Agenda of City Planning Committee Meeting

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 5

31/5/2021

City Planning Committee Meeting (Open Portion) held Monday, 31 May 2021 at 5:00 pm in the Council Chamber, Town Hall.

This meeting of the City Planning Committee is held in accordance with a Notice issued by the Premier on 3 April 2020 under section 18 of the COVID-19 Disease Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020.

The title Chief Executive Officer is a term of reference for the General Manager as appointed by Council pursuant s.61 of the Local Government Act 1993 (Tas).

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Deputy Lord Mayor Burnet (Chairman)

Briscoe

Harvey

Behrakis

Dutta

Coats

NON-MEMBERS

Lord Mayor Reynolds

Zucco

Sexton

Thomas

Ewin

Sherlock

Apologies:

Leave of Absence: Nil.

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, 17 May 2021, 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 Chief Executive Officer.

4. Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest

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

Members of the Committee 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 Chief Executive Officer 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 11

31/5/2021

7.1 Applications under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015

7.1.1 1 Enterprise Road, Sandy Bay - Partial Demolition and Alterations

PLN-21-225 - FILE REF: F21/48837

Address: 1 Enterprise Road, Sandy Bay

Proposal: Partial Demolition and Alterations

Expiry Date: 8 June 2021

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Tristan Widdowson

REcommendation

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the City Planning Committee, in accordance with the delegations contained in its terms of reference, approve the application for Partial Demolition and Alterations at 1 Enterprise Road, 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 PLN21225 1 ENTERPRISE ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

PLN s1

Landscaping is to be undertaken and maintained along the frontage of the property, adjoining proposed retaining wall. The landscaping is to be completed within 60 days of the completion of the retaining wall.

Reason for condition

In the interest of the streetscape.

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).

Advice:

Under section 23 of the Urban Drainage Act 2013 it is an offence for a property owner to direct stormwater onto a neighbouring property.

Reason for condition

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

COUNCIL RESERVES

This permit does not authorise any works on the adjoining Council reserve, Bicentennial Park. Any act that causes, or is likely to cause, damage to Council’s land may be in breach of Council’s Public Spaces Bylaw and penalties may apply. A permit is required for works on Council land. The bylaw is available here.

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-21-225 - 1 ENTERPRISE ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-21-225 - 1 ENTERPRISE ROAD SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 7.1.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 50

31/5/2021

7.1.2 38A Nicholas Drive, 1A Enterprise Road, 24 Gardenia Grove, Sandy Bay, Nicholas Drive (CT 48805/8) and Nicholas Drive (CT 48805/9) Sandy Bay - Shared Use Trail Realignment

PLN-21-193 - FILE REF: F21/48197

Address: 38A Nicholas Drive, 1A Enterprise Road, 24 Gardenia Grove, Sandy Bay, Nicholas Drive (CT 48805/8) and Nicholas Drive (CT 48805/9) Sandy Bay

Proposal: Shared Used Trail Realignment

Expiry Date: 8 June 2021

Extension of Time: Not applicable

Author: Cameron Sherriff

REcommendation

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council approve the application for Shared Use Trail Realignment, at 38A Nicholas Drive, 1A Enterprise Road, 24 Gardenia Grove and Nicholas Drive (CT 48805/8 and CT 48805/9), 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 PLN21193 38A NICHOLAS DRIVE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

Reason for condition

To clarify the scope of the permit.

ENV 8

An approved Rockfall Risk Management Plan must be implemented during construction works.

Prior to the commencement of works, a Rockfall Risk Management Plan for construction works within the Landslide Hazard Area must be submitted and approved. The Rockfall Risk Management Plan must be prepared by, or endorsed by, a suitably qualified geotechnical practitioner.

Reason for condition

To reduce the risk to life and property, and the cost to the community, caused by landslides.

ENV 9

Once works have commenced, public access to the track must not be allowed until after the geotechnical assessment required by condition ENV10 has been completed and all recommendations have been implemented.

Reason for condition

To reduce the risk to life and property, and the cost to the community, caused by landslides

ENV 10

Following completion of the works, and prior to allowing public access to the site, a suitably qualified geotechnical practitioner must assess the risk of rock fall/rock roll to users of the track within the Landslide Hazard Area. If the assessment determines that risk would be unacceptable without risk treatments being applied, all recommended risk treatment measures must be implemented so that the resultant risk is tolerable, prior to allowing public access to the track.

Reason for condition

To reduce the risk to life and property, and the cost to the community, caused by landslides

ENV 11

Clearing of native vegetation and soil disturbance must not exceed a 2m wide strip along the track route, except where associated with an approved borrow pit or where the vegetation has been assessed as an unacceptable safety risk for users of the track by a suitably qualified person using an accepted best practice assessment methodology (e.g. QTRA, VALID).

Reason for condition

To ensure the use/development does not result in unnecessary or unacceptable loss of priority biodiversity values

ENV 12

Trees with a diameter at breast height (DBH) of greater than 20cm must not be removed, except where a tree has been assessed as an unacceptable safety risk for users of the track by a suitably qualified person using an accepted bestpractice assessment methodology (e.g. QTRA, VALID).

Reason for condition

To ensure the use/development does not result in unnecessary or unacceptable loss of priority biodiversity values

ENV 14

No works may occur within 2m of the trunks of the six mature trees shown on ‘Map 1 – Sly Grog Track Reroute’, except where a tree has been assessed as an unacceptable safety risk for users of the track by a suitably qualified person using an accepted bestpractice assessment methodology (e.g. QTRA, VALID).

Reason for condition

To ensure the use/development does not result in unnecessary or unacceptable loss of priority biodiversity values

ENV 15

The location, design and rehabilitation of any borrow pits, must be approved by the planning authority prior to any borrow pits being constructed.

Reason for condition

To ensure the use/development does not result in unnecessary or unacceptable loss of priority biodiversity values.

ENV 16

An approved weed management plan (WMP) must be implemented.

Prior to the commencement of works, a weed management plan prepared by a suitably qualified person must be submitted and approved as a Condition Endorsement. The WMP must:

· address the area within 40m of the track on titles 48805/7, 48805/8, 48805/9 and 137356/1;

· identify and map the declared and environmental weeds in the area;

· set out an environmentallyappropriate methodology and program for eradicating, or minimising, the identified weeds (including appropriate disposal);

· include clear and detailed actions, the area to be targeted, the timing of each action and the persons/parties responsible for undertaking all actions; and

· include prescriptions to minimise impacts on native vegetation and minimise soil disturbance.

Advice:

This condition requires further information to be submitted as a Condition Endorsement. Refer to the Condition Endorsement advice at the end of this permit.

Reason for condition

To ensure the use/development does not result in unnecessary or unacceptable loss of priority biodiversity values

ENV 1

An approved Construction Environmental management Plan (CEMP) must be implemented.

Prior to the commencement of works, a CEMP must be submitted and approved as a Condition Endorsement. The CEMP must:

· detail the proposed construction methodology (particularly where works may have environmental impacts);

· identify all potential environmental impacts associated with the works including (as relevant) noise, odours, air pollution, water pollution, land contamination, erosion, land instability, changes to hydrology, habitat degradation and impacts upon flora and fauna; and

· include measures to adequately avoid or mitigate all identified environmental risks.

To be approved, the CEMP must:

· specify that works will progress from the northwestern end of the track to the southeastern end of the track;

· include measures to ensure that no works will occur within 2m of the six mature trees shown on ‘Map 1 – Sly Grog Track Reroute’;

· include soil and water management measures;

· specify that soils will not be imported onto the site, unless approved by the planning authority;

· include weed and pathogen hygiene measures; and

· specify that if evidence of raptor nesting, swift parrot nesting or marsupial denning is observed, work must stop immediately, and appropriate management measures, approved by the planning authority, must be implemented.

Advice:

This condition requires further information to be submitted as a Condition Endorsement. Refer to the Condition Endorsement advice at the end of this permit.

Reason for condition

To minimise the potential for environmental impacts from the construction works

HER s1

The name of the track 'Sly Grog Track' is not approved. An alternative name for the proposed shared use track is required that reflects and responds to the history of the site as set out in the Historic Heritage Assessment Final report (Gondwana Heritage Solutions, February 2021).

Reason for condition

To ensure the heritage and historical significance of the place are accurately reflected in the naming of the track.

HER s2

All recommendations outlined in the 'Proposed Sly Grog Track Reroute, Historic Heritage Assessment Final Report' by Gondwana Heritage Solutions, February 2021, Section 8, pp 5759 must be implemented.

Reasons for condition

To ensure identified heritage values are recognised and protected.

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 any condition requires that further documents are submitted and approved, you will need to submit the relevant documentation to satisfy the condition via the Condition Endorsement Submission on Council's online services eplanning portal. Detailed instructions can be found here.

A fee of 2% of the value of the works for new public assets (stormwater infrastructure, roads and related assets) will apply for the condition endorsement application.

Once approved, the Council will respond to you via email that the condition has been endorsed (satisfied).

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.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS PLAN

Rerouting of the Sly Grog Track must be done in a manner that avoids impact to the mature eucalypts and minimises other environmental impact, is safe for the construction crew and the reservevisiting public and minimises inconvenience for the public.

A Public Spaces Bylaw permit will be required for the trackworks. You can apply for the permit here.

As part of the bylaw permit, an Environmental Management and Communications Plan will be required, prepared by the contractor to the satisfaction of the Director City Amenity.

A template for an Environmental Management and Communications Plan can be provided by the Open Space Planning Team, call 03 6238 2488. This plan must be made specific for the works that will occur within Bicentennial Park and must incorporate the recommendations from the values assessment reports prepared for the reroute planning.

Attachment a: PLN-21-193 - 38A NICHOLAS DRIVE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-21-193 - 38A NICHOLAS DRIVE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Attachment c: PLN-21-193 - 38A NICHOLAS DRIVE SANDY BAY TAS 7005 - Referral Officer Report - Environmental Development Planner; Senior Cultural Heritage Officer ⇩

Item No. 7.1.3

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 270

31/5/2021

Memorandum: City Planning Committee

607 - 627 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson - Subdivision (9 Additional Lots, Road, Lot, Public Open Space Lot
and Balance) - ETA-21-27

Introduction:

This memorandum relates to a request to extend the time in which to substantially commence planning permit PLN140117701 for Subdivision (9 Additional Lots, Road Lot, Public Open Space Lot and Balance) at 607627 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson. The request was made on 3 February 2021.

The original planning report and approved plan of subdivision are provided as Attachment A to this memorandum.

Background:

On 19 November 2018, planning approval was granted by the full Council for Subdivision (9 Additional Lots, Road Lot, Public Open Space Lot and Balance) at 607627 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson.

The development was assessed under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. There were four discretions:

1. Schedule D – Siting and Landscaping – Clause D.6 Watercourse Setback: Whereby there would be works within 10m of the top of the bank of a watercourse

2. Schedule I – Clearing of Land – Clause I.2 Clearing more than 500sqm: The proposal included disturbance of more than 500m2 of land where the permitted standard allows clearing of 500m2 within 2 consecutive years.

3. Schedule K – Rescode – Clause K.3.1 PC1.4 Residential Density: Whereby seven lots would not meet the permitted 25m frontage and two lots would not meet the 25m inscribed circle.

4. Schedule Q – Storm Surge and Flood Prone Land – Clause Q.5.1 P1 Standards for Development within Flood Prone Land: Whereby part of the site is classified as floor prone land.

Four (4) representations were received within the statutory advertising period with concerns about the noncompliance with the current planning scheme, bushfire hazards, and unacceptable impacts on environmental and ecological values. No appeal was lodged with the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal, and as such, the date the planning permit commenced was the date of approval, 19 November 2018.

The applicant has two years from the date of the permit to substantially commence the development, which is 19 November 2020, and six additional months until 19 May 2021 to request a two year extension of time in which to substantially commence. There has been no work undertaken to date. It is noted that a substantial amount of design work is underway by the applicant to meet the conditions of planning approval. An application for condition endorsement has been lodged with the Council, however it has not been granted because additional information is required from the applicant. The applicant has indicated that the need for the extension of time in which to substantially commence the planning permit is because the 'gaining of engineering approval has delayed construction commencement'.

The applicant has requested a two year extension of time (until 19 November 2022) within which to substantially commence the work. The request is made under section 53(5)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993. The request was made on 3 February 2021, which is within the six month additional period allowed under this provision.

Evaluation:

Extension of time delegation:

Normally, requests for an extension of time to substantially commence a permit are determined at officer level under delegation. However, that officer delegation can only be exercised when the 'strategic intent of the relevant planning scheme has not significantly changed'. The applicant lodged the development application as a valid application in 2014, at which time the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 was in force. However, on 20 May 2015, that changed with the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 coming into force. 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 so far as they are applicable to the development, delegation to determine the request to extend the time in which to substantially commence the permit rests with the Council.

The strategic intent of the planning scheme:

When the proposal was assessed under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the property was located within the Residential 2 Zone, and setback from the watercourse, land clearing residential density and flood prone land were the discretions.

The property is now located within the Low Density Residential, Environmental Living and Rural Living Zone under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. The proposed development would be sited predominantly in the Low Density Residential Zone and partially in the Environmental Living Zone.

The development standards for subdivision in the Rural Living Zone include minimum permitted frontage of 30m. In regards to frontage, the majority of lots would not comply with the permitted standard, however there is discretion to approve a frontage of down to 6m for a normal lot and 3.6m for an internal lot. It is proposed that lot 8 would have a frontage of 5.8m and would not be an internal lot. This would not comply with the minimum discretionary frontage and as such cannot be approved under the current planning scheme.

Under the previous City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, bushfire and landslide issues were dealt with under Principle 22, Site Suitability. In the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, these issues have been formalised into codes. When assessed originally, vegetation removal was assessed under Schedule I Clearing of Land of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. Under that planning scheme, it was permitted to clear up to 500m2 within two consecutive years, with a discretion to approve larger areas subject to assessment against the relevant criteria. Under the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the site is subject to the Biodiversity Code under clause E10.0, which includes specific standards relating to subdivision. The Council's Environmental Development Planner has reconsidered the proposal against the provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 and has provided the following comments:

The strategic intent of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 (HIPS) has shifted towards a more prescriptive protection of biodiversity values than the protections under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. In particular, the HIPS affords greater protection to priority fauna habitat. The site is documented as containing priority fauna habitat.

Although a full assessment of the subdivision proposal against the requirements of the Biodiversity Code of the HIPS has not been undertaken, it is questionable whether clause E10.8.1 P1 would be met. This is due to the potential impacts on priority biodiversity values (swift parrot habitat) resulting from the development, particularly the potential extent of clearing for bushfire hazard management. The Australian conservation status of the swift parrot was raised from Endangered to Critically Endangered in May 2016 under schedules to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. This status change occurred after the implementation of HIPS, as was therefore not considered in the current approval.

In summary, the permit extension is recommended for refusal given that the strategic intent of the planning scheme has changed to afford greater protection to biodiversity values.

In regards to engineering aspects of the application, such as vehicle access and servicing, the Council's Development Engineer has provided the following assessment:

In a council related engineering context, the proposal can still be accepted under either Acceptable Solutions or Performance Criteria for each relevant clause of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

Accordingly, the change in zone, land clearing and biodiversity protection requirements are considered to have significantly changed the strategic intent of the planning scheme provisions applicable to the site. Therefore, delegation to determine the request for an extension of time to substantially commence the permit rests with the Council.

Conclusion:

The strategic intent of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 has significantly changed in respect of 607627 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson as the site is now within the Low Density Residential Zone and the Biodiversity Code applies. Therefore delegation to determine the request to extend the time in which to substantially commence the permit rests with the Council.

As a consequence of the change in strategic intent of the planning scheme provisions applicable to the site, if this proposal for a 9 lot subdivision at 607627 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson was submitted under the current planning scheme, it could not be approved because one of the lots cannot meet the absolute minimum frontage. A full assessment against the biodiversity code provisions would also be required.

On that basis it is recommended that the Council does not grant the request for an extension of time in which to substantially commence the planning permit.

If the Council refuses to grant the extension of time request, the permit will lapse and cannot be acted on. There is no provision under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to appeal an extension of time refusal. However, the applicant can lodge a new development application to be assessed under the current Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.

If the Council grants the request for an extension of time to the planning permit, the applicant will have until 19 November 2022 to substantially commence the work.

REcommendation

That the Council refuse to grant the extension of time in which to substantially commence planning permit PLN140117701.

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.

Karen Abey

Acting Director City Planning

Date: 26 May 2021

File Reference: F21/48126

Attachment a: PLN-14-01177-01 - 607-627 Nelson Road - MOUNT NELSON - Committee Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-14-01177-01 - 607-627 NELSON ROAD MOUNT NELSON TAS 7007 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 7.1.4

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 411

31/5/2021

7.1.4 19 Bluestone Rise, Lenah Valley - Dwelling

PLN-21-207 - FILE REF: F21/48194

Address: 19 Bluestone Rise, Lenah Valley

Proposal: Dwelling

Expiry Date: 1 June 2021

Extension of Time:

Author: Victoria Maxwell

REcommendation

That pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the City Planning Committee, in accordance with the delegations contained in its terms of reference, approve the application for a Dwelling at 19 BLUESTONE RISE LENAH VALLEY TAS 7008 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 PLN21207 19 BLUESTONE RISE LENAH VALLEY TAS 7008 Final Planning Documents except where modified below.

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 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).

Natural runoff from the undeveloped upslope catchment must be safely conveyed through the site without causing any nuisance to thirdparty land by concentrating or relocating the flows.

Advice:

Council notes that the private plumbing and landscaping design should take the natural runoff and springs known in the area into consideration, to avoid damage and nuisance to the development.

Reason for condition

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

SW 9

Prior to occupancy or the commencement of the approved use (whichever occurs first), detention for stormwater discharges from the development must be installed.

A stormwater management report and design must be submitted and approved as a Condition Endorsement, prior to the issue of any approval under the Building Act 2016 or the commencement of work on the site (whichever occurs first). The stormwater management report and design must be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer and must:

1. include detailed design and revised supporting calculations of the detention tank showing:

1. detention tank sizing such that the maximum flow rate from the development is 2.5L/s up to the 5% AEP event, as per the registered dealing on the title;

2. the layouts, the inlet and outlet (including long section), outlet size, overflow mechanism and invert level;

3. the discharge rates and emptying times; and

4. all assumptions must be clearly stated;

2. include a supporting maintenance plan, which specifies the required 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 and maintained in accordance with the approved stormwater management report and design.

Advice:

This condition requires further information to be submitted as a Condition Endorsement. Refer to the Condition Endorsement advice at the end of this permit.

ENG 3a

Prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first), the access driveway, ramps, and parking module (parking spaces, and manoeuvring area) must be designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 (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.

Advice:

It is advised that designers consider the detailed design of the access and parking module prior to finalising the Finished Floor Level (FFL) of the parking spaces (especially if located within a garage incorporated into the dwelling), as failure to do so may result in difficulty complying with this condition.

Reason for condition

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

ENG 4

Prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first), the access driveway, ramps, and parking module (parking spaces, and manoeuvring area) approved by this permit must be constructed to a sealed standard (spray seal, asphalt, concrete, pavers or equivalent Council approved) and surface drained to the Council's stormwater infrastructure.

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 11

Prior to first occupation or commencement of use (whichever occurs first), the proposed crossover between 19 Bluestone Rise and the City highway reservation must be designed and constructed in general accordance with:

1. LGAT Standard Drawing Urban TSDR09v1 – Urban Roads Driveways;

2. LGAT Standard Drawing Footpath Urban Roads Footpaths TSDR11 v1; or

3. A Council City Infrastructure Division approved alternate design.

Advice:

Local Government Association (LGAT) Tasmanian Standard Drawings (TSD) can be viewed electronically via the LGAT Website.

It is advised that designers consider the detailed design of the crossover, access and parking module prior to finalising the Finished Floor Level (FFL) of the parking spaces (especially if located within a garage incorporated into the dwelling), as failure to do so may result in difficulty complying with this condition.

Please note that your proposal does not include adjustment of footpath levels. Any adjustment to footpath levels necessary to suit the design of proposed floor, parking module or driveway levels will require separate agreement from the Council's Road Services Engineer and may require further planning approvals. It is advised to place a note to this affect on construction drawings for the site and/or other relevant engineering drawings to ensure that contractors are made aware of this requirement.

Please contact Council’s City Amenity Division to discuss approval of alternate designs. Based on a site specific assessment, Council’s City Amenity Division Road Engineer may permit extending nonapproved concrete slab crossover, and where nonstandard kerb and channel exists a concrete plinth to Council standards may be permitted for construction at the gutter.

You are likely to require a Permit to Open Up and Temporarily Occupy a Highway (for work within the highway reservation). Click here for more information.

Reason for condition

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

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.

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 2

Sediment and erosion control measures, in accordance with an approved soil and water management plan (SWMP), must be installed prior to the commencement of work and maintained until such time as all disturbed areas have been stabilised and/or restored or sealed to the Council’s satisfaction.

A SWMP must be submitted as a Condition Endorsement prior to the issue of any approval under the Building Act 2016 or the commencement of work, whichever occurs first. The SWMP must be prepared in accordance with the Soil and Water Management on Building and Construction Sites fact sheets (Derwent Estuary Program, 2008), available here.

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

Advice:

This condition requires further information to be submitted as a Condition Endorsement. Refer to the Condition Endorsement advice at the end of this permit.

Reason for condition

To avoid the pollution and sedimentation of roads, drains and natural watercourses that could be caused by erosion and runoff from the development.

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

A fee of 2% of the value of the works for new public assets (stormwater infrastructure, roads and related assets) will apply for the condition endorsement application.

Once approved, the Council will respond to you via email that the condition has been endorsed (satisfied).

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.

OCCUPATION OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAY

You may require a Permit to Open Up and Temporarily Occupy a Highway (for work in the road reserve). Click here for more information.

STORMWATER

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.

WORK WITHIN THE HIGHWAY RESERVATION

Please note development must be in accordance with the Hobart City Council’s Infrastructure By law. Click here for more information.

DRIVEWAY SURFACING OVER HIGHWAY RESERVATION

If a coloured or textured surface is used for the driveway access within the Highway Reservation, the Council or other service provider will not match this on any reinstatement of the driveway access within the Highway Reservation required in the future.

STORMWATER / ROADS / ACCESS

Services to be designed and constructed in accordance with the (IPWEA) LGAT – standard drawings. Click here for more information.

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.

PART 5 AGREEMENT

The planning authority consents to the owner(s) not implementing and maintaining the Bushfire Management Plan referred to in Part 5 Agreement E192106 provided that the submitted bushfire hazard management plan certified by J Blowfield dated 24 September 2020 is implemented and complied with.

Attachment a: PLN-21-207 - 19 BLUESTONE RISE LENAH VALLEY TAS 7008 - Planning Committee or Delegated Report ⇩

Attachment b: PLN-21-207 19 BLUESTONE RISE LENAH VALLEY TAS 7008 - CPC Agenda Documents ⇩

Item No. 8.1

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 532

31/5/2021

REPORT TITLE: Draft Southern Tasmanian Regional Cat Management Strategy

REPORT PROVIDED BY: Manager Development Compliance

1. Report Purpose and Community Benefit

1.1. The purpose of this report is to:

1.1.1. Present the draft Southern Tasmania Regional Cat Management Strategy 2021-2026 (the Strategy) (Attachment A) and;

1.1.2. To obtain Council endorsement of Strategy.

2. Report Summary

2.1. The Council has been requested to endorse the Southern Tasmania Regional Cat Management Strategy 2021-2026.

2.2. The Strategy was developed by representatives from the majority of the southern councils, the State Government, Ten Lives Cat Centre, RSPCA, and the Australian Veterinary Association who collectively comprise the Southern Cat Management Working Group.

2.3. The Strategy identifies actions for cat management for Southern Tasmania that participants may undertake on a voluntary opt-in basis.

2.4. The City of Hobart currently deliver or are able to deliver approximately 60% of the actions in the Strategy with the balance unable to be implemented due to lack of available resources and funding.

3. Recommendation

That the Council endorse the Southern Tasmania Regional Cat Management Strategy 2021-2026 noting that endorsement is provided on the basis that:

(i) The Strategy does not bind the City of Hobart to particular actions; and

(ii) Implementation of the actions not already delivered by the City of Hobart will only be undertaken when resource levels are increased through financial assistance or other forms of support from the State Government or through on-going and recurrent revenue streams introduced under the Cat Management Act 2009.

4. Background

4.1. In 2018 the Tasmanian Government funded three Regional Cat Management Coordinators across Tasmania to help implement aspects of the Tasmanian Cat Management Plan 2017-2022.

4.2. In late 2018, the Southern Cat Management Working Group was formed to look at cat management at a regional level, identifying shared challenges and possible solutions in relation to cat management. The Working Group is made up of representatives from the majority of the southern councils, the State Government, Ten Lives Cat Centre, RSPCA, and the Australian Veterinary Association. The City of Hobart actively participates in the Working Group with the Manager Development Compliance a member of the Working Group.

4.3. The Working Group identified the potential benefits of developing a Southern Tasmania Cat Management Strategy, and this received in principle support from the twelve southern councils. Throughout 2020, the Working Group developed the Strategy with the assistance of a consultant.

4.4. The Strategy is intended as a guiding document for key partners and stakeholders, such as Cat Management Facilities, RSPCA, the Australian Veterinary Association, the State Government and councils.

4.5. The Strategy adopts a voluntary opt-in approach and does not bind participants to particular actions or resourcing.

4.6. The Strategy identifies eight areas of focus for cat management across Southern Tasmania, and notes actions relevant to each area.

4.7. Table 1 (below) shows the eight issues and the desired outcomes as reflected in the Strategy.

	Areas of focus	Desired outcome
1	Increasing education and awareness of responsible cat ownership	For all cat owners to understand and practice responsible cat ownership.
2	Protecting significant conservation, commercial and community assets	To have significant conservation, commercial and community assets identified with appropriate strategies developed to mitigate cat related impacts at priority sites.
3	Reducing the stray cat population	To reduce the stray cat population and maintain it at a low level, using best practice cat management techniques.
4	Uncontrolled cat breeding and welfare concerns	For all cat breeding in the region to be only undertaken by registered or permitted breeders and animal welfare standards maintained, including by addressing cat hoarding cases with a coordinated response.
5	Increasing cat management capacity and accessibility to cat management services throughout the region	To increase cat management capacity and access to cat management services across the region, ensuring rural and remote communities have access to services.
6	Compliance in relation to the Cat Management Act 2009	For all cat owners and community members to comply with their legal obligations for responsible cat ownership and management.
7	Improved knowledge to better inform cat management	To have cat management in the region guided by best available science and regionally-relevant data to support evidence-based decision making.
8	Strategic governance and resourcing	For the Southern Cat Management Strategy to be successfully delivered across the region by Strategy participants.

Table 1: The eight cat management issues and corresponding desired outcomes as identified in the draft Southern Tasmania Regional Cat Management Strategy

4.8. The Strategy provides direction for future cat management activities and encourages collaboration for implementation, while retaining flexibility to enable participants to engage as they require and where resources permit.

4.9. The Strategy provides a shared focus to coordinate priorities and actions using limited collective resources for greatest effect in the region. This includes:

4.9.1. A common intent across the region for strategic priorities and joint action, with flexibility for participation;

4.9.2. Productive use of the resources of Council and others and aligned with state initiatives and investment;

4.9.3. The right for Council to determine its commitment of resources to actions for priorities it shares with the region;

4.9.4. Greater capacity for collaboration to address difficult cat management issues and avoid conflicting directions.

4.10. The Strategy has been endorsed by Kingborough, Tasman and Southern Midlands councils with the remaining councils considering support for the strategy.

4.11. The City of Hobart is already delivering on 32% of the proposed actions with a further 28% able to delivered when the need arises (for example, cat management covenants on land near high conservation areas) or through the introduction of minor changes (for example, updates to the City of Hobart website) (see Attachment B).

4.12. However, there are 40% of actions which are unable to be implemented due to lack of available resources and funding.

5. Proposal and Implementation

5.1. It is proposed that Council endorse the Strategy noting that endorsement is provided on the basis that:

5.1.1. The Strategy does not bind councils to particular actions; and

5.1.2. That implementation of the actions not already delivered by the City of Hobart will only be undertaken when resource levels are increased through financial assistance and other forms of support from the State Government or through on-going and recurrent revenue streams introduced under the Act.

6. Strategic Planning and Policy Considerations

6.1. The Strategy aligns with Pillar 6 of the Capital City Strategic Plan 2019–29: The natural environment is part of the city and biodiversity is preserved, secure and flourishing.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. The endorsement of the Strategy does not require specific financial commitments from Council.

7.2. If Council at any time chooses to undertake certain actions based upon the Strategy, those actions would need to be costed and budgeted at that time.

8. Legal, Risk and Legislative Considerations

8.1. Cat management is governed by the Cat Management Act 2009 which is administrated by the State Government. The Cat Management Act 2009 has recently been amended; some changes commenced on 1 March 2021, and others will come into effect on 1 March 2022.

8.2. When the Cat Management Act 2009 was introduced it was acknowledged in the Second Reading Speech that there was a clear intention not to impose new obligations on Councils, rather a regime of voluntary action was facilitated by the legislative power to take action, for example by the ability to make by-laws in relation to cat management and declare council-controlled land as prohibited areas. This approach was widely welcomed by local government.

8.3. The Tasmania Cat Management Plan 2017-2022 was adopted by the State Government in 2017. The Plan was expressed to represent the first comprehensive and collaborative approach to managing cats in Tasmania an expressly identified that cat management was a shared responsibility across all levels of government, business and the community.

8.4. When commenting on the draft Cat Management Plan 2017-2022 before its adoption, the City of Hobart expressed concern about the transfer of responsibility for cat management to councils without on-going and recurrent financial assistance to ensure that councils can increase their resources to meet the increase in responsibilities.

8.5. Similarly, for the objectives in the Strategy to effectively implemented and enforced, Council will require increased resources to meet the increased responsibilities. It will be difficult for the City of Hobart to deliver all the actions without the issue of funding being addressed.

9. Environmental Considerations

9.1. The impacts of cats on native wildlife, agriculture and communities are widely accepted. Cats require management to reduce their impacts across these areas.

9.2. The Strategy presents a comprehensive approach to dealing with cats across the various domestic and natural environments that they currently occupy with the notable exception of feral cats. The large majority of complaints received by the City of Hobart relate to feral cats and there are no actions in the Strategy addressing the impact of feral cats.

10. Social and Customer Considerations

10.1. Recent changes to state legislation is expected to bring greater expectations in the community for cat management.

10.2. The Strategy has the potential to raise expectations for Council to act, fund the cost of such actions, and/or force Council to act to maintain continuity with state and regional partners.

10.3. However, it does recognise that participation is subject to individual capacity and priorities. Acting alone is potentially more risky with less benefit for the community and the environment. The Strategy reduces risks of being out of step with community expectations and with other councils, stakeholders and experts.

11. Community and Stakeholder Engagement

11.1. The Strategy was produced with input from councils, key partners and industry stakeholders including:

· Southern Councils

· Tasmanian Cat Management Project

· RSPCA Tasmania

· Ten Lives Cat Centre

· Local Government Association of Tasmania

· Tasmanian Government- Parks & Wildlife Services and Biosecurity Tasmania

· Australian Veterinary Association

11.2. The Strategy also identifies actions to undertake community consultation and engagement in relation to cat management as a part of the Strategy.

12. Delegation

12.1. The decision to endorse the Strategy must be considered by Council.

Kirsten Turner

Manager Development Compliance

Date: 26 May 2021

File Reference: F21/47669; 17/65

Attachment a: Southern Cat Management Draft Strategy 2021- 2026 ⇩

Attachment b: Southern Cat Management Draft Strategy - City of Hobart Action Analysis ⇩

Item No. 9.2

Agenda (Open Portion)

City Planning Committee Meeting

Page 581

31/5/2021

Memorandum: Lord Mayor

Deputy Lord Mayor

Elected Members

Response to Question Without Notice

Planning Schemes - Urban Design Guidelines

Meeting: City Planning Committee

Meeting date: 19 April 2021

Raised by: Lord Mayor Reynolds

Question:

Can the Director outline if there are Australian examples of Planning Schemes with urban design guidelines embedded in them?

Response:

Some planning schemes in other Australian states do incorporate urban design guidelines, or are intending to. Some examples are detailed below (but are not intended to be an exhaustive list):

- The City of Perth incorporates a Planning Policy Manual into its planning scheme. This Planning Policy Manual includes provisions that are (in conjunction with other parts of the planning scheme) used as a basis for assessing and determining development applications. The Planning Policy Manual includes ‘City Development Design Guidelines’ which are a set of urban design principles and guidelines for the design of buildings and spaces to achieve an enhanced urban environment. The ‘City Design Guidelines’ can be accessed via this link: file:///C:/Users/crawfords/Downloads/41%20City%20Development%20Design%20Guidelines%20(1).pdf

- The City of Melbourne has prepared a planning scheme amendment that intends to introduce urban design policies into the scheme to ensure high quality human scale streets and public spaces. This amendment represents the first comprehensive review of existing urban design related policies in the Melbourne Planning Scheme since 1999. The proposed Design and Development Overlay 1 (DDO1) will be part of the Melbourne Planning Scheme itself and sets objectives, application requirements, exemptions and design outcomes and requirements for various topics (such as Urban Structure, Site Layout, Building Mass, Public Interfaces and Design Detail).

Additionally, there is a Central Melbourne Design Guide that is included as a reference document in the planning scheme that acts as an illustrated guide showing how the provisions of DDO1 can be achieved. This additional guide is non-statutory, but it covers only content that is within the scope of the statutory DDO1 policies.

More information on this amendment can be found here: https://participate.melbourne.vic.gov.au/amendmentc308/amendment-overview

Victoria also has some general ‘Urban Design Guidelines for Victoria’, which are cited in the Victorian planning schemes as a non-statutory reference document for consideration where relevant.

- The South Australian planning system, following recent planning reform, now allows for ‘Design Standards’ to be introduced that support the Planning and Design Code (the planning scheme). However, it appears that to date no Design Standards have been prepared.

Some other planning schemes (such as Brisbane) refer to design frameworks, but they are non-statutory documents that assist in guiding development design.

It is worth noting that the planning systems and structure of planning schemes are different for different states. Some other states include a higher level of capacity to include guiding principles rather than the more rigid Acceptable Solution/Performance Criteria model of Tasmanian planning schemes.

Sarah Crawford

Development Planner

Karen Abey

Acting Director City Planning

Date: 26 May 2021

File Reference: F21/41378; 13-1-10

People	We care about 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 are transparent, work to high ethical and professional standards and are accountable for delivering outcomes for our community.