Agenda of City Planning Committee Meeting

Item No. 7.1.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 14

25/11/2019

Memorandum: City Planning Committee

46,48-50-52 New Town Road and 7A Clare Street and Adjacent Road Reserve, New Town - Demolition, New Building for Hospital Services, Business and Professional Services, and General Retail and Hire, Signage, and Associated Infrastructure Works - Deferral

Introduction

This memorandum relates to planning application PLN-19-291 proposing Demolition, New Building for Hospital Services, Business and Professional Services, and General Retail and Hire, Signage, and Associated Infrastructure Works at 46, 48-50 and 52 New Town Road, 7A Clare Street and Adjacent Road Reserve, New Town.

The application was publicly advertised between 20 August and 3 September 2019 and received fifty four (54) representations, fifty two (52) objecting to, one (1) supporting, and one (1) whose position was unclear. The application was assessed by officers against the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, and a report (dated 7 October 2019 - Attachment A to this memorandum) recommending refusal of the proposal was presented to the Council’s City Planning Committee at their meeting of 28 October 2019. At that meeting, the Committee resolved as follows:

That the item be deferred to a subsequent City Planning Committee meeting to allow time for a meeting to be convened between the Applicant and Representors to see if a satisfactory solution can be reached in relation to the concerns raised by the Representors.

Post-Deferral Advice

Following that deferral, advice was sought from both the applicant and from representors who made deputations at the Committee meeting of 28 October 2019 regarding whether there had been any outcomes since deferral of the application.

The applicant has advised that an onsite meeting was held with representors, which was amicable and undertaken without prejudice, as agreed by all parties. They have indicated that representors were briefed on potential changes to the proposal intended to alleviate their concerns, to which they were appreciative.

The applicant has advised that the representors at the meeting indicated that they did not represent all representors and could not provide any further feedback regarding the changes, but agreed with the applicant that the planning process was the appropriate forum for further discussions.

Representors who made deputations at the Committee meeting of 28 October 2019 have confirmed that a meeting was convened between themselves and the applicant, where they agreed to the applicant’s request that the discussions proceed without prejudice.

Those representors have also confirmed that the applicant presented several potential alterations to the development on an electronic display at that meeting, and that they (the representors) indicated that any response to those alterations could only be provided after further advice had been sought.

They have also advised that following consideration, their position is that those potential alterations do not address the non-compliance issues identified by representors and in the City of Hobart officer assessment, and may in fact contribute to some issues.

Those representors have advised that they contacted the applicant following the meeting to express their thanks, and to indicate that they remained open to further discussions. They have also advised that they believe the problems associated with the application aren’t trivial, and unfortunately cannot be addressed with small alterations to the building layout and/or operating conditions.

They advise that they sincerely thank the Council and elected members for the opportunity, that they would gratefully accept any further opportunities to discuss their views and concerns at an upcoming City Planning Committee meeting, and that they look forward to continuing to work towards a timely resolution to this matter.

Supplementary Information

The applicant has also provided supplementary information in the form of potential changes to the proposal intended to respond to the recommended basis for refusal and concerns raised by representors. That supplementary information is attached to this memorandum, and includes a covering letter from the applicant (Attachment E), potential amended plans (Attachment F), a potential amended landscape plan (Attachment G), a revised acoustic report (Attachment H) and additional photomontages showing the potential changes compared to existing street and townscapes (Attachment I).

In their covering letter, the applicant provides a brief summary of the potential changes, which is as follows:

In the supplementary information covering letter dated 12 November 2019, the applicant indicates that they are of the view that these potential changes do not substantially alter the proposed use or development and could be specified as conditions of any planning permit issued by the Council.

The applicant has been advised that this view – that the potential changes shown in the supplementary information could be approved as conditions of a possible planning permit - is not shared by City of Hobart officers. The officer view is that the only way the changes shown in the supplementary information could become part of the application is if the applicant formally amended the application to include those changes, after which the amended proposal would be publicly re-advertised to provide the community with the opportunity to view and make representations in relation to the amended application if they wished. An extension of time would also need to be granted for at least 42 days to enable not only the re-advertising of the application to occur, but for the amended proposal incorporating the changes to be formally assessed by City officers before being presented to future City Planning Committee and Council meetings. That advice has been conveyed to the applicant, who has indicated they understand the officer view.

As the applicant’s preference is for the application to be considered at the City Planning Committee meeting of 25 November 2019 and subsequent Council meeting of 2 December 2019 rather than to grant an extension of time and formally amend and re-advertise the proposal, the potential changes shown in the supplementary information do not form part of the application and have not been assessed by City of Hobart officers against the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. However, some of the potential changes, including the changes to setback to the southwest boundary and the proposed green wall adjacent to the northwest boundary, would appear to be beyond the scope of conditions ordinarily imposed by the Council.

Although acknowledging that these matters are arguable, the risk associated with issuing any approval that includes conditions associated with the potential changes shown in the supplementary information is that the change they require is of such an extent that the Council would not have determined the application as proposed (and publicly advertised), with the conditions being considered tantamount to refusal.

Although there is little risk of the applicant appealing any approval issued subject to such conditions, a successful third party appeal made by one of the application’s 54 representors could potentially be accompanied by an examination of an approval’s overall validity if that approval included conditions requiring the changes offered by the applicant. Again, while arguable, there are potential cost implications for the Council if this scenario were to arise.

Conclusion

Following deferral by the City Planning Committee, a meeting was held between the applicant and representors, where representors were briefed on potential changes that could be made to the proposal. Following the meeting, representors have advised that while they have thanked the applicant for the opportunity to meet, the potential changes do not address the issues identified by representors or City of Hobart officers, and may contribute to some of those issues.

The applicant has asked that the Council consider approving the application subject to conditions that would achieve the changes shown in the supplementary information. If the Council is of a mind to issue such an approval, it is recommended that other standard conditions associated with servicing and the like be included.

The officer view, however, is that any approval that included conditions to achieve those changes would require the proposal applied for to be changed to such an extent that the validity of such an approval would be questionable in the event of a third party appeal, exposing Council to potential costs. It is therefore recommended that the Council refuse the proposal for the reasons detailed in the attached planning report, and that the proponents be encouraged to submit a new application responding to the concerns outlined in that report.

Following extensions of time granted by the applicant, the application is due to expire on 3 December 2019.

REcommendation

That:

Pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council refuse the application for Demolition, New Building for Hospital Services, Business and Professional Services, and General Retail and Hire, Signage, and Associated Infrastructure Works at 46, 48-50, and 52 New Town Road, and 7A Clare Street, New Town for the following reasons:

1. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.3.1 P1 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because the proposed hours of operation of the 24 hour hospital component of the development will have an unreasonable impact upon the residential amenity through commercial vehicle movements, noise or other emissions that are unreasonable in their timing, duration or extent.

2. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.3.1 P4 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because the potential timing of commercial vehicle movements could result in unreasonable adverse impact upon residential amenity.

3. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.4.1 P1 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because the proposed building is not consistent with the built form of the surrounding buildings, offers little or no transition between the site and its surrounds, does not contribute positively to the streetscape and will have an unreasonable impact on residential amenity of land in the Inner Residential Zone.

4. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.4.1 P2 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because the proposed building is not compatible with the built form of the surrounding buildings.

5. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.4.2 P2 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because it does not prevent unreasonable adverse impacts on residential amenity by overshadowing, overlooking, and visual impact from adjoining Inner Residential Zoned Properties.

6. The proposal does not meet the acceptable solution or the performance criterion with respect to clause 15.4.5 P1 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 because the extent, location and proposed species for the landscaping of the site is not sufficient to enhance the appearance of the development, or to avoid unreasonable adverse impact on the visual amenity of adjoining land in the Inner Residential Zone.

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: 20 November 2019

File Reference: F19/149442

Attachment a: PLN-19-291 - 52 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: DA-19-49352 PLN-19-291 - 46, 48-50 AND 52 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 AND ADJACENT ROAD RESERVE - CPC Agenda Documents (Supporting information)

Attachment c: PLN-19-291 - 46, 48-50 AND 52 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 AND ADJACENT ROAD RESERVE - CPC Supporting Documents (Supporting information)

Attachment d: PLN-19-291 - 52 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Planning Referral Officer Environmental Development Planner Report (Supporting information)

Attachment e: PLN-19-291 - 46 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Supplementary Info - Planning - Covering letter from applicant dated 12 November 2019 Additional Information - AIS-19-1762 ⇩

Attachment f: PLN-19-291- 46 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Supplementary Information - Amended Plan - Additional Information - AIS-19-1762 ⇩

Attachment g: PLN-19-291- 46 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Supplementary Information - Amended Landscape Plan - Additional Information - AIS-19-1762 ⇩

Attachment h: PLN-19-291 - 46 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Supplementary Information - Amended Acoustic Report - Additional Information - AIS-19-1762 ⇩

Attachment i: PLN-19-291 - 48-50 NEW TOWN ROAD NEW TOWN TAS 7008 - Suplementary Information - Photo montages - additional information AIS-19-1777 ⇩

Item No. 7.1.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 218

25/11/2019

7.1.3 636 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay and 636A & B Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay - Demolition and Two Multiple Dwellings

PLN-19-359 - FILE REF: F19/149890

Address: 636 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY
636 A & B SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY

Proposal: Demolition and Two Multiple Dwellings

Expiry Date: 2 December 2019

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Helen Ayers

REcommendation

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for demolition and two multiple dwellings at 636 and 636 A + B Sandy Bay Road 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 PLN19359 636 AND 636A SANDY BAY ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 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 2019/00881HCC dated 23/08/2019 as attached to the permit.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENG sw1

All stormwater from the proposed development (including but not limited to: roofed areas, ag drains, retaining wall ag drains and impervious surfaces such as driveways and paved areas) must be drained to the Council’s stormwater infrastructure prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first).

Reason for condition

To ensure that stormwater from the site will be discharged to a suitable Council approved outlet.

ENG sw2.1

A preconstruction CCTV recording of the Council’s stormwater main within/adjacent to the proposed development, along with photos of any drainage structures to be connected to or modified, must be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of work.

The postconstruction CCTV recording and photos will be relied upon to establish the extent of any damage caused to Council’s stormwater infrastructure during construction. If the owner/developer fails to provide Council with preconstruction CCTV recording then any damage to Council’s infrastructure identified in the postconstruction CCTV recording 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.

ENG sw2.2

A postconstruction CCTV recording of the Council’s stormwater main within/adjacent to the proposed development, along with photos of any existing drainage structures connected to or modified as part of the development, must be submitted to Council upon completion of work.

The postconstruction CCTV recording and photos will be relied upon to establish the extent of any damage caused to Council’s stormwater infrastructure during construction. If the owner/developer fails to provide Council with preconstruction CCTV then any damage to Council’s infrastructure identified in the postconstruction CCTV 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.

ENG sw3

The proposed foundations and overhangs must be designed to ensure the protection and access to the Council’s stormwater main.

A detailed design must be submitted and approved prior to construction. The detailed design must:

1. Demonstrate how the design will ensure the protection to the Council’s stormwater main.

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

Advice:

Detailed design must include indicative plans and crosssections, clearly indicating the relationship both vertically and horizontally between Council’s stormwater infrastructure and the proposed works (including footings and overhangs). These drawings must demonstrate that no loading will be imposed on Council’s infrastructure, that the Council stormwater infrastructure will be outside the zone of influence of the footings, and that the structure will be fully independent of the main and its trenching.

The applicant is required to submit detailed design documentation to satisfy this condition via the Council's planning condition endorsement process (noting there is a fee associated with condition endorsement approval of engineering drawings [see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement and for fees and charges]). This is a separate process to any building approval under the Building Act 2016.

Failure to address condition requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

To ensure the protection of the Council’s hydraulic infrastructure.

ENG sw4

The new stormwater connection must be constructed and existing abandoned connections sealed by the Council at the owner’s expense, prior to the first occupation.

Detailed engineering drawings must be submitted and approved, prior to commencement of work. The detailed engineering drawings must include:

1. the location of the proposed connection; and

2. the size of the connection appropriate to satisfy the needs of the development.

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

approved detailed engineering drawings.

Advice:

Under Urban drainage act 2013 Part 4 Connections, property owners are only allowed to have a single connection point to a public stormwater system.

The applicant is advised to submit detailed design drawings via a Council City Amenity Division application for a new stormwater connection. If detailed design to satisfy this condition is submitted via the planning condition endorsement process there may be fees associated with the assessment, and once approved the applicant will still need to submit an application for a new stormwater connection with Council City Amenity Division.

Where building / plumbing approval is also required, it is recommended that documentation to satisfy this condition is submitted well before submitting documentation for building/plumbing approval. Failure to address planning

condition requirements prior to submitting for building/plumbing approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

To ensure the site is drained adequately.

ENG sw7

Stormwater detention for stormwater discharges from the development must be installed prior to commencement of use.

A stormwater management report and design must be submitted and approved, prior to issue of any consent under the Building Act 2016 or construction. The stormwater management report and design must:

1. Be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer

2. Provide details and supporting calculations of the detention tank sized such that there is no increase in flows from the developed site up to 5% AEP storm events and no worsening of existing flooding. All assumptions must be clearly stated.

3. Show layout, of the inlet and outlet including longsection.

4. Details of the overflow mechanism.

5. Clarification of the emptying times and outlet size.

6. Include supporting maintenance plan

7. Include a Stormwater Management Summary Plan that outlines the

obligations for future property owners to stormwater management, including a maintenance plan which outlines the operational and maintenance measures to check and ensure the ongoing effective operation of all systems, such as: inspection frequency; cleanout procedures; descriptions and diagrams of how the installed systems operate; details of the life of assets and replacement requirements.

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved stormwater management report and design.

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

Where building approval is also required, it is recommended that documentation for condition endorsement be submitted well before submitting documentation for building approval. Failure to address condition endorsement requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

To avoid the possible pollution of drainage systems and natural watercourses, and to comply with relevant State legislation.

ENG tr1

Traffic management within the access driveway must be installed prior to the commencement of the use.

Traffic management design drawing(s) (including signage and line marking), must be submitted and approved, prior to commencement of the use. The design drawing(s) must include (but not be limited to):

1. Be prepared by a suitably qualified person.

2. Signs each side of the driveway entry/exit (adjacent to, and 2m above the pedestrian path in Sandy Bay Road) with the text `caution vehicles exiting' clearly displayed.

3. A road hump located at the car park exit to ensure low vehicle speeds when crossing the pedestrian path and exiting onto Sandy Bay Road;

All work required by this condition must be undertaken in accordance with the approved traffic management design drawings.

Advice:

· Once the traffic management design drawings have been approved Council will issue a condition endorsement (see general advice on how to obtain condition endorsement).

· Where building approval is also required, it is recommended that documentation for condition endorsement be submitted well before submitting documentation for building approval. Failure to address condition endorsement requirements prior to submitting for building approval may result in unexpected delays.

Reason for condition

In the interests of user safety and the amenity of the occupiers of the development.

ENG 3a

The access driveway and parking module must be designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS2890.1:2004 (including the requirement for vehicle safety barriers where required), or a Council approved alternate design certified by a suitably qualified engineer to provide a safe and efficient access, and enable safe, easy and efficient use.

Reason for condition

To ensure the safety of users of the access and parking module, and compliance with the relevant Australian Standard.

ENG 3b

The access driveway and parking module design must be submitted and approved, prior to the issuing of any approval under the Building Act 2016.

The access driveway and parking module design must:

1. Be prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer,

2. Be generally in accordance with the Australian Standard AS/NZS2890.1:2004,

3. Where the design deviates from AS/NZS2890.1:2004 the designer must demonstrate that the design will provide a safe and efficient access, and enable safe, easy and efficient use, and

4. Show dimensions, levels, gradients & transitions, and other details as Council deem necessary to satisfy the above requirement.

Advice:

· Once the design 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 safety of users of the access and parking module, and compliance with the relevant Australian Standard.

ENG 4

The access driveway and parking module approved by this permit must be constructed to a sealed standard and surface drained to the Council's stormwater infrastructure prior to the commencement of use.

Reason for condition

To ensure the safety of users of the access driveway and parking module, and that it does not detract from the amenity of users, adjoining occupiers or the environment by preventing dust, mud and sediment transport.

ENG 5

The number of car parking spaces approved on the site for use is two (2).

All parking spaces must be delineated by means of yellow lines 80mm to

100mm wide in accordance with Australian Standards AS/NZS 2890.6 2009. The shared area between the two parking spaces must be marked with non slip yellow, 45deg diagonal stripes 150mm200mm wide, with spaces 200mm300mm between each stripe.

All linemarking must be completed prior to commencement of use.

Reason for condition

To ensure the provision of parking for the use is safe and efficient.

ENG 1

Any damage to council infrastructure resulting from the implementation of this permit, must, at the discretion of the Council:

1. Be met by the owner by way of reimbursement (cost of repair and reinstatement to be paid by the owner to the Council); or

2. Be repaired and reinstated by the owner to the satisfaction of the

Council.

A photographic record of the Council's 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, preexisting 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's 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's 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, and 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

The finished floor level of the apartments must be 2.5m AHD or higher.

Reason for condition

To ensure that risk from coastal inundation is appropriately managed

ENV s2

Any filling of the site must not raise the existing ground level by more than

0.5m.

Reason for condition

To ensure that landfill does not unreasonably increase the risk from coastal inundation

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 ENGINEERING

All engineering drawings required to be submitted and approved by this planning permit must be submitted to the City of Hobart as a CEP (Condition Endorsement) via the City’s Online Service Development Portal. When lodging a CEP, please reference the PLN number of the associated Planning Application. Each CEP must also include an estimation of the cost of works shown on the submitted engineering drawings. Once that estimation has been confirmed by the City’s Engineer, the following fees are payable for each CEP submitted and must be paid prior to the City of Hobart commencing assessment of the engineering drawings in each CEP:

Value of Building Works Approved by Planning Permit Fee:

· Up to $20,000: $150 per application.

· Over $20,000: 2% of the value of the works as assessed by the City's Engineer per assessment.

These fees are additional to building and plumbing fees charged under the Building and Plumbing Regulations.

Once the CEP is lodged via the Online Service Development Portal, if the value of building works approved by your planning permit is over $20,000, please contact the City’s Development Engineer on 6238 2715 to confirm the estimation of the cost of works shown on the submitted engineering drawings has been accepted.

Once confirmed, pleased call one of the City’s Customer Service Officers on 6238

2190 to make payment, quoting the reference number (ie. CEP number) of the Condition Endorsement you have lodged. Once payment is made, your engineering drawings will be assessed.

BUILDING PERMIT

You may need building approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016. Click here for more information.

This is a Discretionary Planning Permit issued in accordance with section 57 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

PLUMBING PERMIT

You may need plumbing approval in accordance with the Building Act 2016, Building Regulations 2016 and the National Construction Code. Click here for more information.

NEW SERVICE CONNECTION

Please contact the Hobart City Council's City Amenity Division to initiate the application process for your new stormwater connection.

STORM WATER

Please note that in addition to a building and/or plumbing permit, development must be in accordance with the Hobart City Council’s Infrastructure By law. Click here for more information.

STRUCTURES CLOSE TO COUNCILS' STORMWATER MAIN

The design of structures (including footings) must provide protection for the Council’s infrastructure. For information regarding appropriate designs please contact the Council's City Amenity Division.

RIGHT OF WAY

The private right of way must not be reduced, restricted or impeded in any way, and all beneficiaries must have complete and unrestricted access at all times.

You should inform yourself as to your rights and responsibilities in respect to the private right of way particularly reducing, restricting or impeding the right during and after construction.

NOISE REGULATIONS

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

WASTE DISPOSAL

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 regarding waste disposal can also be found on the Council’s website.

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-19-359 - 636 SANDY BAY ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-19-359 - 636 AND 636A SANDY BAY ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 7.1.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 319

25/11/2019

REPORT TITLE: Amendment PSA-19-1 - Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 - Amenity Standards in the Central Business and Commercial Zones

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Development Planner

Manager Planning Policy & Heritage

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to consider the merits of the representation received in relation to the draft PSA-19-1 Amendment to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 (HIPS 2015). It also considers recommendations to the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) regarding the need for any modifications to the amendment.

1.2. The proposal benefits the community by encouraging a higher level of amenity for residents of, and visitors to, the central Hobart area, without unduly restricting commercial development that meets the zone purposes.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The proposal is to consider 1 representation made in relation to planning scheme amendment PSA-19-1 – Amenity Standards in the Central Business and Commercial Zones.

2.2. The representation is provided in full in Attachment A.

2.3. At its meeting on 9 September 2019, Council resolved to initiate the PSA-19-1 Amendment to the HIPS 2015 to include standards relating to amenity (primarily for residential and visitor accommodation uses) in the Central Business Zone and Commercial Zone.

2.4. The certified amendment was placed on exhibition from 18 September 2019 to 16 October 2019.

2.5. The representation received raised the following main points:

2.5.1. Overall, the changes are positive and will improve liveability. High design quality and amenity benefits both the developer and the community;

2.5.2. On smaller sites, boundary setbacks and minimum courtyard dimensions of 5m may be restrictive;

2.5.3. Courtyards should not be restricted to being ‘central’, best located in a position appropriate to north;

2.5.4. Setbacks for terrace designs may not be best placed at the rear, depending on orientation of the site;

2.5.5. An external window visible from all points of a living room may be prohibitive. Suggest visibility from 75% of a living room;

2.5.6. Above ground floor level private open space not being located within 5m of private open space on another building may be restrictive for smaller sites;

2.5.7. Space for heat pumps should be separate to balconies;

2.5.8. Communal spaces are important but should not be seen as an alternative to private open space;

2.5.9. Discretionary exception from the requirement to provide onsite waste collection should also be provided for new buildings on the basis of site constraints, heritage or streetscape, not only for existing buildings.

2.6. The issues raised in the representation have been considered, and some amendments suggested.

2.7. Some additional changes to the provisions, outside of the issues raised in the representation, are also proposed.

2.8. The recommended updated amendment document is provided as Attachment B, showing marked revisions.

3. Recommendation

That:

1. Pursuant to Section 39(2) of the former provisions of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, Council endorse this report as the formal statement of its opinion as to the merit of the representation received during the exhibition of the draft PSA-19-1 Amendment.

2. Pursuant to Section 39(2) of the former provisions of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, Council recommend to the Tasmanian Planning Commission that the PSA-19-1 Amendment to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 be finally approved, as modified in Attachment B.

4. Background

4.1. At its meeting on 9 September 2019, Council resolved to initiate the PSA-19-1 Amendment to the HIPS 2015 to include standards relating to amenity (primarily for residential and visitor accommodation uses) in the Central Business Zone and Commercial Zone.

4.2. The standards relate to 5 categories – noise, access to daylight and natural ventilation, open space, storage and waste storage and collection.

4.3. A workshop was held with elected members on 12 August 2019 to consider the proposed standards. Changes arising from this workshop were included in the final draft amendment as initiated on 9 September 3019.

4.4. The certified amendment was placed on exhibition from 18 September 2019 to 16 October 2019.

4.5. One representation was received during this statutory advertising period. A full copy of the representation is provided in Attachment A.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. The proposal is to consider 1 representation made in relation to planning scheme amendment PSA-19-1 – Amenity Standards in the Central Business and Commercial Zones.

5.2. Some additional changes to the provisions, outside of the issues raised in the representation, are also proposed.

5.3. The representation received during the formal exhibition period was from the Tasmanian Chapter of the Australian Institute of Architects. The representation is provided in full in Attachment A.

5.4. A summary of the issues raised in the representation, along with responses, is detailed as follows:

Issue

Response

Overall, the proposed changes are positive and will assist in ensuring developments are more liveable. Developments of a high design quality and amenity are beneficial to both developers and the community.

Noted.

Clause 22.4.9/23.4.8 A2

Residential or serviced apartment components of a new building must:

(a) unless a wall with no habitable room windows, be set back from a side or rear boundary, or another building on the same site, at least 5m (including external elements such as a balcony, roof garden, terrace or deck);

(b) be designed around a central open courtyard or void with a minimum horizontal dimension of 5m in all directions; or

(c) be of a terraced design that is set back from a rear boundary at least 5m (including external elements such as a balcony, roof garden, terrace or deck).

In relation to (a)

On smaller sites, 5m setback is restrictive, particularly to a balcony/deck. 3m more appropriate and aligns with National Construction Code, which requires 6m separation of openings opposite and 3m separation from boundary (‘fire source feature’).

Smaller scale developments within the CBZ should be promoted to encourage small scale developers and to fit with the urban grain of the city.

It is noted that some sites in Hobart may not be able to meet this separation distance on all sides.

Subclause (c) of the Acceptable Solution allows for terrace style developments 5m clearance to the rear boundary, but no minimum side boundary setback. This clause is proposed to be amended to allow for further design flexibility (See ‘in relation to (c)’ below).

5m separation is an average requirement in relation to provisions in other Australian cities, and on the smaller side for higher elements. Allowing for a lesser setback as an Acceptable Solution is not considered to be desirable as the development potential on adjacent sites, particularly in the Central Business Zone, can allow for buildings of significant height. In both the Commercial and Central Business Zones, commercial development is not required to consider the amenity of existing adjacent residential buildings.

Setbacks lesser than 5m can be considered under the performance criteria, where the design allows for sufficient light and ventilation. If a site is too small to accommodate development that adequately meets these criteria, it may be too small for a multiple dwelling development.

In relation to (b)

A small site would not necessarily have the space to accommodate a courtyard of 5m. A dimension of 3m may be more appropriate.

The use of the term ‘central’ is ambiguous – courtyards and voids to allow light would best be located at a position appropriate to north in relation to the site and its surrounds.

Developments on particularly small sites are unlikely to be designed around a courtyard.

Where a courtyard or void is surrounded on all, or most, sides by buildings, it is important to allow for sufficient space to provide daylight, ventilation, and some degree of privacy between dwellings. 5m is not considered to be an unreasonable dimension for courtyards and voids. Smaller courtyards and voids can be considered under the performance criteria.

It is accepted that the term ‘central’ could preclude some forms of courtyards or voids that are open on one or more sides. The term ‘central’ should be removed.

In relation to (c)

Setbacks from the rear may not be the best aspect – this would be determined by the orientation of the site.

It is ambiguous as to whether the first clause (a) also needs to be adhered to when adhering with clause (b) or (c) as there is only an ‘or’ between clauses (b) and (c).

The intent of this clause is to allow for duel aspect dwellings that have sufficient light and ventilation to both aspects, but potentially no side setback.

It is acknowledged that this acceptable solution could be broadened to allow for different building orientations.

It is proposed to amend the acceptable solution to allow for any building containing only duel aspect apartments to take advantage of aspect. The building would be required to have a 5m separation between both of the aspects and the boundary (whether side or rear) but potentially no setback from the other boundaries.

In terms of which clauses are required to be met, drafting conventions dictate that where there is an ‘or’ before the final clause in a list, and no other ‘ands’ or ‘ors’ in the list, all clauses are ‘or’. This means developments are only required to comply with one of these three options.

Clause 22.4.9/23.4.8 A3

Every habitable room in a dwelling:

(a) must have at least one external window;

(b) must have at least one external window visible from all points of the room if a living room;

(c) where the only external window in the room is located within a recess, that recess must be:

(i) a minimum width of 1.2m; and

(ii) a maximum depth of 1.5 times the width, measured from the external surface of the external window;

(d) must have a room depth from an external window of not more than 2.5 times the ceiling height; and

(e) in open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined), must have a room depth from an external window of no more than 8m.

In relation to (b)

An external window that is required to be visible from all points of a living room could be prohibitive. Visible from 75% of the room might be more appropriate.

It is not considered overly prohibitive to require that living rooms have a window visible from all points the room as an acceptable solution. These are critical spaces for light penetration, and should be encouraged to be as light as possible.

Habitable rooms other than living rooms may include windows that are not visible from every point of the room, under A3(c). Living rooms with windows that are not visible from all points of the room may be considered under the performance criteria, where they provide for adequate light and ventilation.

Clause 22.4.9/23.4.8 A5

Private open space for dwellings or serviced apartments must:

(a) have an area not less than:

(i) 8m² for 1 bedroom dwellings or serviced apartments;

(ii) 10m² for 2 bedroom dwellings or serviced apartments;

(iii) 12m² for 3 or more bedroom dwellings or serviced apartments;

(b) where the outdoor component of an air conditioning unit is located within the private open space, include a further 1.5m² of area in addition to the minimum area in (a) above.

(c) unless drying facilities are provided elsewhere on the site, include a clothes drying area of at least 2m² in addition to the minimum area in (a) above, that may be in a separate location, and is screened from public view;

(d) have a minimum horizontal dimension of 2m, or 1.5m for a 1 bedroom dwelling or serviced apartment;

(e) not be located on a face of the building that is orientated between 30 degrees East of South and 30 degrees West of South;

(f) where above ground floor level, not be located within 5m of private open space of any other dwelling or serviced apartment in another building; and

(g) be screened visually and acoustically from mechanical plant and equipment, service structures and lift motor rooms, unless the outdoor component of an air conditioning unit servicing that dwelling or serviced apartment.

In relation to (f)

Might prove to be restrictive, especially with smaller developments.

This requirement is in line with the separation from boundary distances and is not considered to be excessive. It is in fact half of the required setback between two new residential buildings (if both meet the 5m boundary setback).

Where a new building is adjacent to another residential development (including a separate building on the same site), it is considered appropriate to offset or set back new balconies from existing areas of private open space to maintain a level of privacy and amenity for both occupants. Developments with a lesser setback can still be considered through the performance criteria.

In relation to (a)

Generally, private open spaces should be encouraged and promoted at sizes that are a minimum, with larger spaces encouraged.

The sizes required in the acceptable solution are in line with requirements in other Australian cities (for example the NSW Apartment Design Guide).

In relation to (b) and (g)

Space for heat pumps should be separate to balconies.

It is acknowledged that this would be a preferred outcome. The acceptable solution should be amended to preclude air conditioning units within private open space as permitted development, but consider this scenario under the performance criteria as long as space allows.

Communal open spaces are also important parts of developments, however should not be seen as an alternative to private open space.

It is noted that private open space and communal open space have different functions. However, some models of development are based on a more communal mode of living. Allowing for these models, as a discretionary option, allows for diversity in the housing market, and choice for purchasers.

Clause 22.4.10/23.4.9 P1

Bulk waste bins that are commercially serviced must be provided unless:

(a) the frontage has a width equivalent to 5m for each dwelling, accommodation unit or tenancy with individual bins, and kerbside collection would not unreasonably compromise the amenity of the surrounding area or the flow and safety of vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians; or

(b) the development is within an existing building and areas for bulk waste bin storage and collection cannot reasonably be provided due to site constraints, or impacts on historic cultural heritage values of a place or precinct listed in the Historic Heritage Code.

In relation to (b)

Discretion is also required here for new buildings, as well as existing buildings.

It is accepted that new buildings may also be subject to these issues, particularly in relation to heritage. This subclause should be amended so that heritage considerations can apply to both existing and new buildings.

With small sites, commercial collection is difficult due to truck heights and turning circles and a desire not to have garbage storage areas taking up street frontage – especially if bins cannot be placed on the street (either due to council requirements or site restrictions).

This is noted. However, the requirement for onsite collection only applies to developments with 5 or more dwellings, or multiple commercial tenancies. If a site is too small to accommodate onsite storage, it is unlikely to be developed to this density. Sites with small street frontage widths cannot reasonably accommodate a large number of bins on the footpath for collection.

It is also noted that, despite the number of dwellings or tenancies on a site, if the number of bins is restricted this can be acceptable. Shared bins between low-waste producing tenancies could meet the Acceptable Solution options. It is also an option that private collectors retrieve bins from within the site, without entering the site with a vehicle (i.e. the bins are wheeled to the kerb).

The storage areas of bins is controlled by a separate provision. It is proposed that this provision (in the Central Business Zone 22.4.10 A2) be amended to require bin storage areas to be set back at least 4.5m from a frontage where in a pedestrian priority area, to ensure blank walls or roller doors are discouraged on a frontage in these areas.

It is considered that these provisions are flexible enough to allow for smaller sites to be reasonably developed.

The numbering of this section requires review.

It is noted that the clause number in the Commercial Zone is referred to as 22.4.9, rather than 23.4.9. This is to be corrected.

5.5. Further to the issues raised in the representation, there are three additional provisions that are proposed to be amended.

5.6. Acceptable Solution 22.4.9/23.4.8 A3 includes standards relating to room depths as follows:

(d) must have a room depth from an external window of not more than 2.5 times the ceiling height; and

(e) in open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined), must have a room depth from an external window of no more than 8m.

5.7. It is not intended that (d) must also be met if (e) is met, although the current structure does not make this clear. As such, the standard should be altered to the following:

(d) must have a room depth from an external window of:

(i) not more than 2.5 times the ceiling height; or

(ii) if an open plan layout (where the living, dining kitchen are combined), not more than 8m.

5.8. Acceptable Solution 22.4.9/23.4.8 A5 includes a standard relating to the orientation of private open space, as follows:

(e) not be located on a face of the building that is orientated between 30 degrees East of South and 30 degrees West of South.

5.9. It is preferred that private open space (such as a deck or balcony) is not located on the shadiest aspect of a building. However, it is noted that as a result of the grid layout in Central Hobart, the primary water view aspect is towards the south-east in the Central Business and Commercial Zones.

5.10. Precluding locating balconies on the primary view aspect as permitted is considered to be overly restrictive, considering the amenity that views provide. This requirement is also considered overly restrictive where existing buildings are converted to residential uses and, given the block orientation and relatively small lot sizes, the only available aspect for balconies faces south-east or south-west.

5.11. In addition, the performance criteria relating to private open space does not require direct consideration of access to sunlight, as it is acknowledged that the provisions for non-residential development in the Central Business and Commercial Zones do not protect sunlight access to adjacent residential development.

5.12. The standard relating to the orientation of private open space should be deleted. The setback provisions requiring buildings (including balconies) to be set back at least 5m from a boundary should ensure that there is adequate opportunity for daylight to these spaces.

5.13. Performance Criterion 23.4.9 P3 includes issues to be considered by a waste collection plan, including:

(h) the volume of pedestrians using the street and whether it is a pedestrian priority street (Figure E6.7.12).

5.14. Unlike in the Central Business Zone, the Commercial Zone does not include any pedestrian priority streets. Where this provision applies in the Commercial Zone, the reference to pedestrian priority streets should be deleted.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. The proposed amendments are consistent with the objectives of the Capital City Strategic Plan 2019-29, in particular with the following outcomes:

6.1.1. Hobart keeps a strong sense of identity, even as the city changes.

6.1.2. Hobart’s cityscape reflects the heritage, cultural and natural environment that make it special.

6.1.3. In City decision-making, we consider how different aspects of Hobart life connect and contribute to sense of place.

6.1.4. Development enhances Hobart’s unique identity, human scale and built heritage.

6.1.5. Community involvement and an understanding of future needs help guide changes to Hobart’s built environment.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. Funding Source and Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.1.1. None.

7.2. Impact on Future Years’ Financial Result

7.2.1. None.

7.3. Asset Related Implications

7.3.1. None.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. The Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA) requires that planning scheme amendments must seek to further the objectives of Schedule 1 of the Act and be prepared in accordance with the State Policies.

8.2. The Objectives of the Act require use and development to occur in a fair, orderly and sustainable manner and for the planning process to facilitate economic development in accordance with the other Schedule 1 Objectives.

8.3. It is considered that the proposed amendment meets the objectives of LUPAA, in particular it:

8.3.1. Assists sound strategic planning by not prejudicing the achievements of the relevant Zone Objectives or the STRLUS objectives;

8.3.2. It is consistent with the objective to establish a system of planning instruments to be the principal way of setting objectives, policies and controls for the use, development and protection of land;

8.3.3. Considers social impacts of residential dwelling densification;

8.3.4. Specifically promotes the health and wellbeing of Tasmanians and visitors by ensuring a pleasant, efficient and safe environment for residents and visitor accommodation occupants;

8.3.5. Considers historical interest of existing buildings;

8.3.6. Considers the capability of the land, given increasing demand for residential accommodation, in a way that ensures residents have adequate access to adequate living amenity.

8.4. No State Policies are directly relevant to the proposed amendments.

8.5. S32(e) of the former provisions of LUPAA requires that planning scheme amendments must, as far as practicable, avoid the potential for land use conflicts with use and development permissible under the planning scheme applying to the adjacent area. This amendment seeks to define parameters around use and development that is already allowable in the zones. The intent is to achieve a higher quality result for occupants within the Commercial and Central Business Zones, and it is not expected this will create conflict between scheme areas.

8.6. S32(f) of the former provisions of LUPAA requires that planning scheme amendments must have regard to the impact that use and development permissible under the amendment will have on the use and development of the region as an entity in environmental, economic and social terms. The proposed amendments aim to improve residential amenity for those living within denser dwelling developments in or near the city, and therefore they are considered to have a positive impact, particularly in social terms, as housing density increases across the region.

8.7. Section 30O of LUPAA requires that an amendment to an interim planning scheme is as far as practicable consistent with the regional land use strategy. It is considered that the amendments are consistent with the strategy, in that they support higher density development in a way that does not compromise amenity for occupants.

9. Environmental Considerations

9.1. The proposal seeks to ensure buildings have adequate access to daylight and natural ventilation, potentially decreasing reliance on energy consumption.

10. Social and Customer Considerations

10.1. The proposal is not considered to have any negative impact on social inclusion.

11. Marketing and Media

11.1. There are no marketing or branding implications of this amendment.

12. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

12.1. The community has been consulted regarding this amendment.

13. Delegation

13.1. This matter is delegated to the Council.

Sarah Crawford Signature

Sarah Crawford

Development Planner

James McIlhenny Signature

James McIlhenny

Manager Planning Policy & Heritage

Date: 20 November 2019

File Reference: F19/136163; PSA-19-1

Attachment a: Representation ⇩

Attachment b: Amendment Document Including Marked Changes ⇩

People	We value people – our community, our customers and colleagues.
Teamwork	We collaborate both within the organisation and with external stakeholders drawing on skills and expertise for the benefit of our community.
Focus and Direction	We have clear goals and plans to achieve sustainable social, environmental and economic outcomes for the Hobart community.
Creativity and Innovation	We embrace new approaches and continuously improve to achieve better outcomes for our community.
Accountability	We work to high ethical and professional standards and are accountable for delivering outcomes for our community.