Open CPC Agenda

Committee Members
Ald Jeff Briscoe (Chairman)

Ald Eva Ruzicka
Ald Helen Burnet
Ald Tanya Denison
Aldermen
Lord Mayor Ald Sue Hickey
Deputy Lord Mayor Ald Ron Christie
Ald Marti Zucco
Ald Peter Sexton
Ald Philip Cocker
Ald Damon Thomas
Ald Suzy Cooper
Ald Anna Reynolds
N. Heath G.M.
H. Salisbury D.G.M.
Corporate Services
K. Baker P.A.M.C.R.
R. Enders P.E.O.L.M.
C.S.O. x2
City Planning
N. Noye D.C.P.
I. Stanley M.D.A.
K. Turner S.L.O.
Parks and City Amenity
G. Doyle D.P.C.A.
Media
Mercury
ABC Radio
Sub Total: 20
Minutes
Reception
Public x2
Trolley
Total Distribution: 25
CITY OF HOBART
AGENDA
CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING
(OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING)
MONDAY 20 JULY 2015
AT 5.00 PM
THE MISSION
Our mission is to ensure good governance of our capital City.
THE VALUES
The Council is:
about people
We value people our community, our customers and colleagues.
professional
We take pride in our work.
enterprising
We look for ways to create value.
responsive
Were accessible and focused on service.
inclusive
We respect diversity in people and ideas.
making a difference
We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobarts future.
HOBART 2025 VISION

In 2025 Hobart will be a city that:
Offers opportunities for all ages and a city for life
Is recognised for its natural beauty and quality of environment
Is well governed at a regional and community level
Achieves good quality development and urban management
Is highly accessible through efficient transport options
Builds strong and healthy communities through diversity, participation and
empathy
Is dynamic, vibrant and culturally expressive
CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

20/7/2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
MINUTES OF THE OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY

PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD ON MONDAY 6 JULY 2015
2.
CONSIDERATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS TO THE AGENDA
3.
INDICATIONS OF PECUNIARY AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
4.
TRANSFER OF AGENDA ITEMS
5.
PLANNING AUTHORITY ITEMS CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS WITH

DEPUTATIONS
6.
COMMITTEE ACTING AS PLANNING AUTHORITY

6.1
6.2
APPLICATIONS UNDER THE CITY OF HOBART PLANNING

SCHEME 1982
6.1.1
4 GOWRIE STREET AND ADJACENT ROAD

RESERVATION, NEW TOWN DEMOLITION, TWO
HOUSES AND ASSOCIATED HYDRAULIC
INFRASTRUCTURE PLN-15-00590-01 FILE REF: 5502683
& P/4/531
6.1.2
361-365 SANDY BAY ROAD (ALSO KNOWN AS 7-9 QUORN

STREET), SANDY BAY PARTIAL DEMOLITION,
EXTENSIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO EDUCATIONAL
ESTABLISHMENT PLN-15-00398-01 FILE REF: 7692409 &
P/361-365/820
6.1.3
30 RED CHAPEL AVENUE, SANDY BAY PARTIAL

DEMOLITION, HOUSE EXTENSION, ALTERATIONS,
ANCILLARY DWELLING, GARAGE, CARPORT AND
STORAGE (READVERTISED - AMENDED PROPOSAL)
PLN-15-00123-01 FILE REF: 5636294 & P/30/784
6.1.4
191 AND 199 NEW TOWN ROAD, NEW TOWN NEW

BUILDING FOR UNLISTED USE (SERVICE STATION),
ALTERATIONS TO HOTEL CAR PARKING AND
CONSOLIDATION OF TITLES PLN-15-00181-01 FILE
REF: 5516065 & P/199/712
6.1.5
1 BURNETT STREET, NORTH HOBART SIGN PLN-1500581-01 FILE REF: 1798691 & P/1/372
APPLICATIONS UNDER THE BATTERY POINT PLANNING

SCHEME 1979

20/7/2015
6.2.1
6.3
6.4
65 HAMPDEN ROAD, BATTERY POINT PARTIAL

CHANGE OF USE TO VISITOR ACCOMMODATION PLN14-00922-01 FILE REF: 5577001 & P/65-67/550
APPLICATIONS UNDER THE SULLIVANS COVE PLANNING

SCHEME 1997
6.3.1
63 SALAMANCA PLACE, BATTERY POINT NEW SIGN

PLN-15-00717-01 FILE REF: 5672316 & P/63/817
6.3.2
SULLIVANS COVE VARIOUS LOCATIONS, HOBART

WAYFINDING SIGNAGE PLN-15-00665-01 FILE REF: 301-62
APPLICATIONS UNDER THE HOBART INTERIM PLANNING

SCHEME 2015
6.4.1
109-113 LIVERPOOL STREET, HOBART PUBLIC

ARTWORK PLN-15-00648-01 FILE REF: 5668077 & P/109113/626
6.4.2
LOT 1, 513 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY CHANGE OF

USE TO CAFE/TAKE-AWAY FOOD PREMISES PLN-1500743-01 FILE REF: 2920150/02 & P/513/820
6.4.3
16 REYNOLDS COURT, DYNNYRNE CHANGE OF USE TO

RESIDENTIAL (BOARDING HOUSE) PLN-15-00632-01
FILE REF: 5638329 & P/16/967
6.4.4
827 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY SIGNAGE PLN-1500549-01 FILE REF: 5645721 & P/827/820
7.
LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS AMENDMENT (TASMANIAN

PLANNING SCHEME) BILL 2015 FILE REF: 16-11-2
8.
SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS PROGRAM UPDATE FILE REF: 33-20-1
MOTION OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN UNDER REGULATION 16 (5)

OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MEETING PROCEDURES) REGULATIONS
2015
9.
PROPOSED NEW HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE -FILE REF: 13-1-9
10. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE FILE REF: 13-1-10

11. CLOSED PORTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

20/7/2015
BUSINESS LISTED ON THE AGENDA IS TO BE CONDUCTED IN THE ORDER

IN WHICH IT IS SET OUT UNLESS THE COMMITTEE BY SIMPLE MAJORITY
DETERMINES OTHERWISE
I, Nicholas David Heath, General Manager of the Hobart City Council, hereby certify
that:
1.
In accordance with Section 65 of the Local Government Act 1993, the reports in
this agenda have been prepared by persons who have the qualifications or the
experience necessary to give such advice, information or recommendations
included therein.
2.
No interests have been notified, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local

Government Act 1993, other than those that have been advised to the Council.
N.D. HEATH
GENERAL MANAGER
CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA (OPEN)

Committee Members
Briscoe (Chairman)
Ruzicka
Burnet
Denison
Aldermen
Lord Mayor Hickey
Deputy Lord Mayor Christie
Zucco
Sexton
Cocker
Thomas
Cooper
Reynolds
City Planning Committee (Open Portion of the Meeting)

- Monday, 20 July 2015 at 5.00 pm in the Lady Osborne
Room.
PRESENT:
APOLOGIES:
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:
CO-OPTION OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN THE

EVENT OF A VACANCY
Where a vacancy may exist from time to time on the
Committee, the Local Government Act 1993 provides that
the Council Committees may fill such a vacancy.
1.
MINUTES OF THE OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY

PLANNING COMMITTEE HELD ON MONDAY 6 JULY 2015

20/7/2015
2.
CONSIDERATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS TO THE AGENDA

In accordance with the requirements of Part 2 Regulation 8 (6) of the Local
Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Committee, by simple
majority may approve the consideration of a matter not appearing on the agenda, where
the General Manager has reported:
(a)
(b)
(c)
the reason it was not possible to include the matter on the agenda, and
that the matter is urgent, and
that advice has been provided under Section 65 of the Local Government Act
1993.
RECOMMENDATION
That the Committee resolve to deal with any supplementary items not appearing on the
agenda, as reported by the General Manager in accordance with the provisions of the
Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015.
3.
INDICATIONS OF PECUNIARY AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

In accordance with Part 2 Regulation 8 (7) of the Local Government (Meeting
Procedures) Regulations 2015, the chairman of a meeting is to request Aldermen to
indicate whether they have, or are likely to have, a pecuniary interest in any item on
the agenda.
In addition, in accordance with the Councils resolution of 14 April 2008, Aldermen
are requested to indicate any conflicts of interest in accordance with the Aldermanic
Code of Conduct adopted by the Council on 27 August 2007.
Accordingly, Aldermen are requested to advise of pecuniary or conflicts of interest
they may have in respect to any matter appearing on the agenda, or any supplementary
item to the agenda, which the committee has resolved to deal with, in accordance with
Part 2 Regulation 8 (6) of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations
2015.
4.
TRANSFER OF AGENDA ITEMS

Are there any items which the meeting believes should be transferred from this agenda
to the closed agenda or from the closed agenda to the open agenda, in accordance with
the procedures allowed under Regulation 15 of the Local Government (Meeting
Procedures) Regulations 2015?

20/7/2015
5.
PLANNING AUTHORITY ITEMS CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS WITH

DEPUTATIONS
In accordance with the requirements of Part 2 Regulation 8 (3) of the Local
Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the General Manager is to
arrange the agenda so that the planning authority items are sequential.
In accordance with Part 2 Regulation 8 (4) of the Local Government (Meeting
Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Committee by simple majority may change the
order of any of the items listed on the agenda, but in the case of planning items they
must still be considered sequentially in other words they still have to be dealt with as
a single group on the agenda.
Where deputations are to be received in respect to planning items, past practice has
been to move consideration of these items to the beginning of the meeting.
RECOMMENDATION
That in accordance with Regulation 8 (4) of the Local Government (Meeting
Procedures) Regulations 2015, the Committee resolve to deal with any items which
have deputations by members of the public regarding any planning matter listed on the
agenda, to be taken out of sequence in order to deal with deputations at the beginning
of the meeting.

20/7/2015
6.

In accordance with the provisions of Part 2 Regulation 25 of the Local Government
(Meeting Procedures) Regulations 2015, the intention of the Committee to act as a
planning authority pursuant to the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 is to be
noted.
In accordance with Regulation 25, the Committee will act as a planning authority in
respect to those matters appearing under this heading on the agenda, inclusive of any
supplementary items.
The Committee is reminded that in order to comply with Regulation 25(2), the General
Manager is to ensure that the reasons for a decision by a Council or Council
Committee acting as a planning authority are recorded in the minutes.
6.1

SCHEME 1982
6.1.1
4 GOWRIE STREET AND ADJACENT ROAD

RESERVATION, NEW TOWN DEMOLITION, TWO
HOUSES AND ASSOCIATED HYDRAULIC
INFRASTRUCTURE PLN-15-00590-01
FILE REF: 5502683 & P/4/531
53xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
Item No. 6.1.1 / Page No. 1
20/7/2015
APPLIC
CATION UN
NDER CITY
Y OF HOBA
ART PLAN
NNING SCH
HEME 1982
2
Type
T
of Re
eport
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
2
Council:
27 July 2015
2
Expiry Date
e:
15 August 2015
Application
A
n No:
PLN-15-00590-01
Address:
A
4 Gowrie
e Street and
d Adjacent road reservvation, New
w Town
Applicant:
A
Ashton Keene,
K
299 Nelson Ro
oad, Mount Nelson
Proposal:
Demolitio
on, two hou
uses and as
ssociated hydraulic
h
inffrastructure
e
Representa
ations:
Seven (7
7)
Discretion:
Density, private ope

en space, building
b
envvelope, privvacy
1.
Execu
utive Summ
mary
1.1.
Planning approval
a
is sought for demolition of the exissting shed and
a
weighbridge at 4 Gow
wrie Street (the site is otherwise vacant), an
nd the
construction of two, two-storey
houses. Work
t
W
to the ssewer main
n is propose
ed
within the road reserrvation.
1.2.
Four (4) discretions

d
were
w
invoke
ed.
1.2.1.
Density
D
1.2.2.
Private
P
ope
en space
1.2.3.
Building
B
envelope
1.2.4.
Privacy
P
1.3.
Seven (7)) representa

ations objeccting to the proposal w
were received within th
he
statutory advertising
a
period.
1.4.
The propo
osal is reco
ommended for approva
al.
1.5.
The final decision

d
ha
as been delegated to the Council.
CPC Agenda
2.
Site D
Detail
Fig.. 1. Subject site
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 4. Subject site
2.1
3.
The property is located within an established residential area, characterised by

predominantly single storey brick or weatherboard houses with some flats and
two-storey houses. The houses are orientated to the street, with small front
gardens, larger rear gardens and off-street parking for one to two cars. Front
fences are generally low.
Proposal
3.1.
The proposal is to demolish the shed and weighbridge on the otherwise vacant
site and construct two, two-storey houses.
3.2.
A sewer main within the site will be diverted, and additional work to the main is
proposed within the road reserve.
Author: Liz Wilson
4 Gowrie Street & Adjacent Road Reservation

-3-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 5. Site plan as proposed
Fig. 6. Northern and southern elevation of the proposed units
Fig. 7. The shed to be demolished.
Author: Liz Wilson

-4-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 8. Area of the site where the western unit will be located, looking towards the rear of 9-9A Bishop Street.
The yellow painted building is the neighbours dwelling. The two cream painted buildings are outbuildings.
Fig. 9. Area of the site where the eastern unit will be located
4.
Background
4.1.
The site was previously used as a woodyard (Gorringes Woodyard), but has
not been used for this purpose since at least 2005.
Author: Liz Wilson

-5-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
5.
20/7/2015
Concerns raised by representors

5.1.
The following table outlines the issues raised by representors. All concerns
raised with respect to the discretions invoked by the proposal will be
addressed in Section 6 of this report.
Please note that five of the representors have lodge reasons for objection
under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. As the application is not
being assessed under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, these
grounds of objection have not been summarised.
Representor #1: The upper level
deck from bedroom 1 (eastern
unit) should be screened as it
looks straight into our living area.
Representors #3 to #7: The
application is invalid because
Section 52(1B) of the Land Use
Planning and Approvals Act 1993
has not been met.
Habitable rooms will directly
overlook neighbours.
The development should have five

(5) parking spaces where three (3)
are proposed.
Sight distance does not comply
with the scheme.
Access points do not ensure safe
access to and from the site.
Representor #2: The western unit

is too high and too close to my
boundary and will unreasonably
overshadow my house.
The proposal is incompatible with
houses in the area.
Representors #3 to #7: The units
do not complement the built and
natural values of the area. They
do not have regard to streetscape
qualities and do not complement
or enhance the character of the
neighbourhood.
The development is visually bulky
and inconsistent with the size and
scale of existing development in
the area (including heritage listed
properties).
Parking is located in front of the
building line.
The cross-over will reduce the

amount of on-street parking.
The units will cause an
unreasonable loss of amenity to
the occupants of adjacent lots
through visual bulk and
unreasonable appearance.
The development does not make
The setback of the garages does
efficient use of the site and does
not comply with the scheme and
not provide for amenity for
be detrimental to streetscape and
residents.
dominate the view of the dwelling
from the street.
While I strongly oppose the
The site should be developed in a
development as proposed, I do not
more sensitive way.
oppose the site being developed.
6.
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within Precinct 17 of the Residential 2 Zone of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
Author: Liz Wilson

-6-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
6.2.
6.3.
20/7/2015
The development has been assessed against;

6.2.1.
Zone objective
6.2.2.
Statement of desired future character
6.2.3.
Rescode (Schedule K)
The following discretions were invoked:

6.3.1.
Discretion Table
Discretion 1
Density
Discretion 2
Private open
space
Building
envelope
Discretion 3
Discretion 4
Privacy
(windows)
Privacy (decks)
6.3.2.
CHPS
requirement
760m2 site area
for two
dwellings
5.0 metres wide
Development
should be sited
within the
building
envelope
9.0 metre
setback for
habitable room
windows to
neighbouring
habitable room
windows
9.0 metre
setback for
decks to
neighbouring
windows; 5.0
metre setback
to boundaries
Proposed
development
698m2
<5.0 metres
wide in parts
The north-west
corner of the
eastern unit is
outside the
envelope
<9.0m in places
<5.0m to
boundaries in
places
Discretion 1 - Density
The development of two houses on a lot in Precinct 17 requires
760m2 of land to be permitted under the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982. The subject site is 698m2.
Interestingly, under the provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning
Scheme 2015, the minimum density in the Inner Residential Zone is
200m2 per multiple dwelling, so three dwellings would be permitted.
Nevertheless, the application was lodged under the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982 and so the provisions of this scheme must be
used. In particular, the proposal must be assessed against
performance criteria PC1.1 to PC1.5.
Author: Liz Wilson

-7-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Clause PC1.1:
The number and size of dwelling units are to complement the built
and natural values of an area.
This clause asks the Council to consider two elements of the
proposal (the number and size of dwellings) and whether these
complement the built and natural values of the area.
The units have a site coverage of 21% where 30% is permitted. Two
storey houses are permissible within the zone. Refusing the houses
based on their size would be inconsistent with what is permitted in
the area, and therefore what is considered to complement the built
and natural values of the area.
In terms of the number of houses, the land is 62m2 short of the
permitted standard. 62m2 is 8% of 760m2. An 8% shortfall is
considered to be a minor discretion as it is, in effect, an additional
31m2 of land next to each dwelling. There are a number of houses in
the immediate vicinity that have a similar footprint to land ratio,
including the closest neighbour at 9-9A Bishop Street. The housing
form and density is consistent with the objective of the Residential 1
Zone of providing diverse dwelling types and the statement of
desired future character for precinct 17 to consist principally of
single detached houses set on small .... allotments.
Clause PC1.2:
Existing dwellings are to maintain a curtilage that provides sufficient
separation to preserve residential amenity.
This Clause is applicable to the curtilage around existing dwellings
when a second dwelling is proposed in the garden behind it. It is not
applicable to this assessment.
Clause PC1.3:
The number and size of dwelling units shall not exceed the capacity
of the current or intended community and/or physical services of the
area.
The number proposed will not exceed community or servicing
capacity in the area.
Clause PC1.4:
This clause is not relevant as a subdivision is not proposed.
Author: Liz Wilson

-8-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Clause PC1.5:
Building form shall have regard to the need to:
(a) minimise direct overlooking of the main internal living areas and
private open spaces of neighbouring dwelling units;
(b) minimise any reduction in existing winter sunlight to the principal
area of ground level living rooms and private open space of
neighbouring dwelling units;
(c) minimize visual bulk in close proximity to existing buildings;
(d) minimise noise intrusion to neighbouring dwelling units; and
(e) complement or enhance the character of the neighbourhood.
The houses have been designed to be within the building envelope
apart from a small section of the north-west corner of the eastern
house. The windows and decks are also generally setback the
distance from neighbouring houses and title boundaries required
under the privacy schedule. The design is considered to minimise the
impact on both the privacy and sunlight loss to neighbouring
properties and so is consistent with (a) and (b). Again, as the houses
are within the building envelope (apart from the upper corner of the
eastern unit), the design minimises visual bulk and complies with (c).
Noise intrusion would not be any different to that normally associated
with residential development in an inner suburb of Hobart and so (d)
is met.
The character of the neighbourhood is typical of streets in New
Town: generally single storey brick or weatherboard houses with
pitched roofs, set in small to standard sized allotments. Less
common in the area are two storey houses or flats. The proposed
design is undoubtedly modern and will contrast with existing olderstyle houses in the area. The issue is, however, that the Council is
only exercising discretion over the design of the houses based on a
62m2 shortfall of land. If the land were 62m2 larger, or if a single
house were proposed, the modern design of the house(s) would be
of no consequence. The two buildings are domestic in appearance,
and will read as two separate, two-storey houses. This housing form
is consistent with the objective of the Residential 1 Zone of providing
diverse dwelling types and the statement of desired future character
for Precinct 17 to build single detached houses set on small ....
allotments. There is no requirement in the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982 that new development in this area of New Town be
single storey or in an older-style. The site is not located within a
heritage precinct under either the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982 or Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
Author: Liz Wilson

-9-
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
In addition, the new density provisions under the Hobart Interim

Planning Scheme 2015 require a minimum of 200m2 per house and a
maximum of 400m2. This would allow three houses to be constructed
on the lot without a density discretion. It is clear from the higher
density provisions under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015
that the Council is aiming for denser development within New Town,
and the proposal is consistent with this.
In summary, if the land were 62m2 larger, the proposal would be
permitted in terms of density. This is a minor discretion as it is a
short-fall of 8% or, in effect, an additional 31m2 of land next to each
house.. If the applicant had lodged the application under the Hobart
Interim Planning Scheme 2015, three houses would be permitted on
a lot of that size, and the Council would have no discretion to refuse
a two house development on the basis of density. A higher density of
infill housing is clearly the desired future state for this area of New
Town, as the density provisions in the Hobart Interim Planning
Scheme 2015 attest. The buildings are domestic in scale, will look
like two detached houses, and so are consistent with the zone
objective and statement of desired future character for the precinct.
The proposal is consistent with the performance criteria, Clauses
PC1.1 to PC1.5.
6.3.3.
Discretion 2 - Private open space

Both houses achieve more than 50m2 of private open space (decks,
patio paving and garden area are included in this calculation);
however some sections of the open space is less than 5.0 metres
wide. This creates a discretion under Clause AS2.1 of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and so the proposal must be
assessed under Clauses PC2.1 to PC2.5 which state:
Clause PC2.1:
Private open space is clearly defined for private use.
Clause PC2.2:
Private open space areas are of dimensions to suit the projected
requirements of the occupants of the dwelling unit, and to
accommodate some outdoor recreational needs as well as providing
space for service functions.
Clause PC2.3:
Part of the private open space is capable of serving as an extension
of the dwelling unit for relaxation, dining, entertaining, recreation and
childrens play, and is accessible from a living room.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 10 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Clause PC2.4:
Location of private open space takes advantage of outlook and the
natural features of the site; minimises adverse impact of adjacent
buildings on privacy and overshadowing; and addresses surveillance,
privacy and security issues where private open space abuts public
spaces.
Clause PC2.5:
Orientation of private open space helps to achieve comfortable yearround use.
The open space is a mixture of paved patio area, unroofed decks
and garden. These areas are orientated to the north, west and/or
east of the houses and so achieve comfortable year round use for a
variety of recreation/dining/entertaining purposes. They are
separated both physically and with a screen to achieve privacy. They
will provide spaces for childrens play as well as clothes drying and
garden storage and are directly accessible from living rooms.
The private open space provisions of the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982 are considered to be met.
6.3.4. Discretion 3 - Building setback and bulk
The houses are located within the building envelope relative to the
side and rear boundaries. The only exception is the north-west
corner of the eastern house which exceeds the envelope by a minor
amount.
Fig. 10. Extent of building envelope discretion
Author: Liz Wilson

- 11 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 11. Extent of building envelope discretion
When assessing a building envelope discretion, the Council is

required to assess the difference in impact between a permitted
development and the development as proposed. In this case, the
amount of building outside the envelope is small, and would not
unreasonably overshadow the neighbouring property (11 Bishop
Street) compared to a permitted development. The extent of wall
outside the envelope is not considered to be overbearing compared
to a permitted development.
The proposal therefore meets Clause PC4.1 of the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982 which states:
Buildings are to be designed and sited such that there is no
unreasonable loss of amenity to the residents of adjacent dwellings
caused by overbearing appearance, loss of daylight or sunlight.
The development is within the building envelope relative to the
neighbour who had concerns about overshadowing, and so there are
no grounds to refuse the proposal on this basis.
6.3.5.
Discretion 4 Privacy
Eastern dwelling
The windows of the eastern dwelling are set back more than 9.0
metres from neighbours habitable room windows and so comply with
Clause AS6.1.
The rear (north-facing) ground floor deck is between 0.5 metres and
1.25 metres above natural ground level and is within 5.0 metres of
the rear boundary. The side (east-facing) ground floor deck is also
slightly over 1.0 meters in part and is closer than 5.0 metres to the
side boundary. This creates a discretion under Clause AS6.2 which
requires decks over 1.0 metre to be set back 5.0 metres from
boundaries.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 12 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The upper level bedroom 1 deck is also within 5.0 metres of the side
boundary. The consultant planners report states screening to this
(upper level) deck in accordance with Clause AS6.3 is shown on the
plan A 1.2 metre high screen is shown which complies with Clause
AS6.3. A condition will be placed on the permit to ensure that this
screen is no more than 25% transparent. This deck is more than 9.0
metres from the neighbours habitable room windows and so a 1.7
metre high screen is not required.
Western dwelling
The western house is within 9.0 metres of a section of the
neighbours house at 11 Bishop Street, New Town. This wall would
not be unreasonably affected by the new windows.
Fig. 12. Neighbouring property at 11 Bishop Street. Source: 4 Gowrie Street New
Town consultant planners report, author: K Loveday.
The ground floor living room window is within 9.0 metres of the rear
of 9-9A Gowrie Street, New Town. Any overlooking from this window
is mitigated by the fact that the window is at ground floor level, with a
boundary fence in between. The upper level window is an ensuite
bathroom. The applicant has proposed screen planting to reduce any
loss of privacy to this neighbour.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 13 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 13. Neighbouring property at 9-9A Bishop Street. The yellow painted wall is
the dwelling. The cream painted wall in the fore-ground is an outbuilding.
Fig. 14. Neighbouring property at 9-9A Bishop Street. The photograph is taken
from Gowrie Street and shows the dwelling (yellow paint) and the small outbuilding
on the boundary (cream paint).
7.
Discussion
7.1.
There are four discretions in relation to the proposal, and seven

representations were received during the statutory advertising period.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 14 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
7.2.
20/7/2015
Five of the representors have argued that the application is invalid because
Section 52 (1B) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 has not
been met. In particular they state:
It is noted that the General Manager of the Hobart City Council has
signed the application form in accordance with Section 52(1B)(a).
However, the application for planning permit form (submitted on 15 May
2015) makes no reference to the Gowrie Street road reservation in the
location of proposed development on page 1 of the form. Furthermore
the General Manager has failed to complete the relevant section on page
4 of that form, meaning that the General Manager has failed to comply
with Section 52(1B)(b) of the Act. As such, the application is not valid, and
the Council (acting as a planning authority) cannot determine the
discretionary planning application under the provisions of the relevant
legislation.
In Councils opinion, the application does satisfy Section 52(1B) of Land Use
Planning and Approvals Act 1993. The General Manager of the Hobart City
Council has signed the application form, thereby granting consent to the
making of the application for development on Council land, in accordance with
Section 52(1B) of the Act. When granting consent to the making of a planning
application, the General Manager is granting consent to the totality of the
application, including the proposal plans. The fact that the application form
does not say and Gowrie Street road reservation in the location of proposed
development on the application form does not mean that the General
Manager has not satisfied Section 52 (1B) of the Land Use Planning and
Approvals Act 1993, and it does not render the application invalid. Similarly,
the fact that the General Manager has not filled in all of the section 4 of the
application form does not mean that the General Manager has not satisfied
Section 52 (1B) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, and it does
not render the application invalid.
7.3.
Five of the representors are concerned that the garages do not have safe sight
distances when exiting onto the foopath. This concern has been assessed by
the Councils Development Engineer, who has recommended approval subject
to a condition to widen the width of the garage openings.
7.4.
Some of the representors have raised grounds of objection which do not relate
directly to the discretion being exercised by the Council. These are as follows.
7.5.
Five of the representors contend that each dwelling unit should provide two
parking spaces plus one visitor space (five in total), thereby creating a parking
discretion under Clause AS3.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
This is not the case. Each house is required to provide 1.5 spaces. 1.5
spaces x two houses = three spaces. The rounding up is done at the end of
the calculation not at the start. If the number of spaces were rounded up from
1.5 to 2.0 before multiplication, there would be no benefit in requiring 1.5
spaces the scheme should simply say 2.0 spaces per dwelling. No visitor
parking is required as the site is not in a cul-de-sac and less than four units
are proposed. Three parking spaces are provided, so there is no parking
discretion.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 15 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
7.6.
Five of the representors contend that the garages are in front of the building
line and so are discretionary under Clause AS3.4 of the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982. Again, this is not considered to be the case. The
garage is within the curtilage of the house and is part of the building line. If this
assumption is incorrect, the garages would comply with the relevant
performance criteria, Clause PC3.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982 in any case, as the garage design (which only projects from the entry to
the front of the house by 1.0 and 1.5m) maintains streetscape amenity,
complements the house design and allows surveillance of the street from
within the house..
7.7.
One representor contends that the application should be refused because the
development is too high and too close to their side boundary. As the building is
within the building envelope relative to this neighbour, there is no discretion to
refuse the proposal on this basis.
7.8.
In summary, the application is for two houses on a disused woodyard site.

The proposal is consistent with the Objective of the Residential 1 Zone
(Clause 5.7 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982), which is to:
Sustain and enhance the character and amenity of established residential
areas with diverse dwelling types.......
7.9.
The proposal is consistent with the statement of desired future character for
precinct 17 (Clause 5.7.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982) which
states:
The precinct should continue as an inner urban residential area consisting
principally of single detached houses set mainly on small to standard size
allotments....
7.10. The proposal is considered to meet the relevant acceptable solutions and
performance criteria. The discretions exercised are relatively minor, and do
not warrant refusal of the proposal.
8.
Conclusion
8.1.
9.
The proposed demolition, two houses and associated hydraulic infrastructure

at 4 Gowrie Street, New Town, satisfies the relevant provision of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, and as such is recommend for approval.
Recommendations
That: A. Pursuant to the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the Council
approve the application for a demolition, two houses and associated
hydraulic infrastructure at 4 Gowrie Street and Adjacent Road
Reservation, New Town for the reasons outlined in the officers report and
a permit containing the following conditions be issued:
Author: Liz Wilson

- 16 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
1.
20/7/2015
The use and development must be substantially in accordance with

the documents and drawings that comprise the planning application
No. PLN-15-00590-01 as outlined in Attachment A to the permit
except where modified below.
Reason for condition
To clarify the scope of the permit.
2.
The use and development must comply with the requirements of

TasWater as detailed in the form Submission to Planning Authority
Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2015/00791-HCC, dated 9 June 2015,
as attached to the permit.
3.
Fixed screening to the satisfaction of the Councils Director City

Planning must be installed prior to the first occupation of the houses
and maintained along the eastern edge of the upper level deck,
which extends from bedroom one of the eastern most house. The
screen must be at least 1.2m in height above the floor level of the
deck and be no more than 25% transparent.
Prior to the issue of any building consent, amended plans
demonstrating compliance with this condition must be submitted to
and approved by the Councils Director City Planning. When
approved, the amended plans will form part of this permit and must
be complied with.
To protect the privacy of the adjacent dwelling.
4.
Prior to the issue of a certificate of completion, the lots comprising

the site area must be the subject of an adhesion order pursuant to
Section 110 of the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act 1993.
To ensure that title arrangements are reflective of and
compatible with the use/development.
5.
All driveways, drainage, services and accesses to/at the site are to
be constructed in accordance with approved working drawings and
specifications and municipal standard drawings and specifications.
To ensure that all works are done to the Councils standards.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 17 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
6.
20/7/2015
The design and construction of the parking, access and turning areas
must generally comply with the Australian Standard, Parking
facilities, Part 1: Off-Street Carparking, AS 2890.1 2004, to the
satisfaction of the Councils Director City Planning.
To ensure that the parking layout for the development is to
accepted standards.
7.
All driveway access and car parking areas must be constructed,

sealed and drained in accordance with approved engineering
drawings and with the Councils standard requirements prior to the
first occupation/new use of the buildings. Note any coloured or
textured surface construction must not extend beyond the back of
footpath.
To ensure that the works will comply with the Councils
standard requirements.
8.
The proposed driveway must comply with the following:

(i)
If constructed to a sealed finish, the finished gradient shall not

exceed 1 in 4 (25%).
(ii)
Vertical alignment shall include transition curves (or straight

sections) to the Australian Standard, Parking facilities - Part 1:
Off-Street Carparking AS 2890.1 - 2004, Clause 2.5.3 (d) at all
grade changes greater than 12.5%.
(iii)
The gradient of any parking areas must not exceed 5%.
(iv) Minimum carriageway width is to be 3.0 metres

Design drawings of the driveway access and car parking areas
showing dimensions, levels, gradients and other details as necessary
and demonstrating compliance with the above requirements shall be
submitted to the Council for approval prior to the issuing of a building
consent under the Building Act 2000 or the commencement of any
construction.
In the interests of vehicle user safety and the amenity of the
development.
9.
Author: Liz Wilson
The entrance to the proposed parking areas must be designed to

allow adequate visibility between vehicles leaving the carpark and
pedestrians on the frontage road footpath, as well as vehicles on the
road.

- 18 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Prior to the issuing of any building consent, amended plans showing

compliance with this condition must be submitted to and approved by
the Councils Director City Planning. When approved, the plans will
form part of this permit and must be complied with.
Advice: Acceptable solutions for achieving adequate visibility as
required by this condition include:
(i)
Compliance with the Australian Standard, Parking facilities Part

1: Off-Street Carparking AS2890.1-2004, Fig 3.3, ie. provide
2.0 metre by 2.5 metre sight splays or triangles.
(ii)
Minimum driveway/garage width is 3 metres. Because the

garage walls on either side of the vehicle entrance are high and
will allow no transparency, as an absolute minimum would
require 1 metre by 1 metre sight triangles on either side of a 3
metre wide driveway. That is you could have a 3 metre wide
clear opening for the vehicle entrance or garage door if it is set
back 1 metre from the front boundary, or you could have a 4
metre wide opening if the entrance is set back 0.5 metres from
the front boundary, or you could have a 5 metres wide clear
opening for the vehicle entrance if it is located at the front
boundary.

To ensure the safety of vehicles entering and leaving the
development and of pedestrians and traffic in the vicinity.
10. A long section of the proposed driveway and crossovers from the
kerb and channel (KC) to the end of the parking bay in accordance
with the Tasmanian Standard Drawings (IPWEA) TSD R09.v1
Urban Roads Driveways, showing appropriate gradients and
prepared by a suitably qualified designer, must be submitted to and
approved by the Council (to the satisfaction of the Director City
Infrastructure) prior to the issue of any building consent.
To ensure that all works are done to Councils standards.
11. Drawings showing the location of the proposed vehicle crossovers
and any services in the vicinity, along with the location of any
redundant driveway crossovers within the highway reservation in
accordance with the Tasmanian Standard Drawings(IPWEA) TSD
R09.v1 Urban Roads Driveways and TSD R14-v1 type KC
vehicular crossing, must be submitted to the satisfaction of the
Director City Infrastructure, prior to the issue of any building consent.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 19 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
12. Construct new vehicle crossovers at developers cost in accordance

with Tasmanian Standard Drawings (IPWEA) TSD R09.v1 Urban
Roads Driveways and TSD R14-v1 type KC vehicular crossing prior
to the issue of a completion/occupancy certificate.
13. Reinstate any redundant vehicle crossovers to footpath, kerb and
gutter in accordance with Tasmanian Standard Drawings(IPWEA)
TSD-R14-v1 and TSD-R15-v1 Type KC( Kerb and Channel ) and
Urban Roads Footpaths TSD-R11-v1 prior to the issue of a
completion/occupancy certificate.
14. The proposed site must be provided with an adequate stormwater
service connection to the Council mains/systems at the developers
cost and to the satisfaction of the Council. The developer is
responsible for the design of the SW service connections. Note that
the size of the proposed connections will depend on the number of
dwellings that they are likely to serve. Existing service connections
may be reused if they are of the appropriate size and are in good
condition. Any proposed building envelopes must be shown clear of
all easements.
A detailed services plan showing both existing and proposed
services and access to all lots on the site must be prepared by a
qualified and experienced designer and submitted to and approved
by the Council prior to the commencement of work on site. The plan
must clearly distinguish between private and public infrastructure.
Advice: Note that the site will also require adequate water and sewer
service connections to Taswater mains/systems. The Services Plan
must clearly show the existing/ proposed water, sewer and
stormwater service connections.
To ensure that all works are done to the Councils standards.
15. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development - including from
roofs, driveways, parking and other paved areas, subsoil and
retaining wall drainage and any rainwater tank overflows, is to be
discharged to the Councils infrastructure/legal point of discharge at
the developers cost. Prior to the issuing of a plumbing or building
consent under the Building Act 2000 and the start of works, submit
design drawings of the proposed stormwater drainage system,
prepared by a suitably qualified designer, to the satisfaction of the
Councils Director City Infrastructure and Director City Planning.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 20 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
These must include appropriate long sections, levels and gradients to

the point of discharge, as required. Drawings must clearly show how
the sites stormwater drainage system will connect into the Council
stormwater drainage system.
Advice:
Please note that pumping systems may only be used where drainage
to Council infrastructure via gravity is impractical. All stormwater
which is able to drain via a gravity system (including suspended and
charged systems) must be allowed to do so.
In accordance with the Tasmanian Plumbing Regulations 2014 you

are required to drain driveways, parking areas and other paved areas
to an approved stormwater disposal system to prevent nuisance
problems with neighbours, or with the public where water flows onto
footpaths. This will require the installation of suitable grated
trenches/spoon drains /grated pits, etc to collect the runoff from
paved areas within the property boundaries and an outlet connection
to the kerb and gutter or to the Council stormwater mains system. A
kerbline on the low side of the paved area may be required to direct
the stormwater to a pit. The paved area should have a suitable
crossfall to the kerbline (a minimum of 3% is often used). Such
drainage must be to the satisfaction of the Councils Plumbing
Compliance Officer.
To ensure that stormwater from the site will be discharged to a
suitable Council approved outlet.
16. If a new stormwater connection is required, of a size appropriate to

satisfy the needs of the development, it must be constructed by the
Council at theowners cost. Prior to the issuing of a plumbing or
building permit/consent under the Building Act 2000, engineering
drawings detailing the connection to Council infrastructure must be
submitted to and approved by Council's Director City Infrastructure.
These must include a long-section and cross-section, highlighting
any potential clashes with other services. Any existing stormwater
connections must be clearly identified on these drawings, and if
redundant, be abandoned and sealed by Council at the owners cost
prior to the issue of any certificate of occupancy/completion. Once
approved, the engineering drawings will form part of this permit and
must be complied with.
Advice: The Plumbing Regulations 2014 require a single stormwater
connection per Lot, at the lowest point practicable of the Lot.
To ensure the site is drained adequately.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 21 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
17. Prior to the issue of any building consent under the Building Act 2000
(including demolition) or the commencement of works on site
(whichever occurs first), submit to and have approved by the
Councils Director City Planning a soil and water management plan
(SWMP) detailing proposed sediment and erosion control measures.
The approved control measures must be installed prior to any
disturbance of soil or vegetation, and must be regularly inspected
and maintained during the construction/ demolition period to prevent
soil and other materials entering the local stormwater system,
roadways or adjoining properties. The control measures must remain
in place until such time as all construction activity likely to generate
sediment has been completed or all disturbed areas have been
stabilised using vegetation and/or restored or sealed to the
satisfaction of the Council. The approved SWMP forms part of this
permit and must be complied with.
Advice: For further guidance on preparing soil and water
management control measures, please refer to the proforma and soil
and water fact sheet no.3- management plans provided in the
planning permit package or alternatively the Department of
Environment, Parks, Heritage and the Arts has published Soil and
Water Management Factsheets (2008). These are available from the
Council or online at www.derwentestuary.org.au
To avoid the pollution and sedimentation of roads, drains and
natural watercourses that could be caused by erosion and
runoff from the development, and to comply with relevant State
legislation.
18. The owner must pay the cost of any alterations and/or reinstatement
to the Councils infrastructure, including the sites service connection
points, incurred as a result of the proposed development works.
To ensure that any Council infrastructure affected by the
proposal will be reinstated at the Developers full cost.
19. Prior to the issuing of any building consent under the Building Act
2000 (including demolition) or the commencement of work on site,
whichever occurs first, the ownershall lodge with the Council an
infrastructure protection bond in the form of a cash/cheque deposit or
a bank guarantee from an approved financial institution, for an
amount of $2,000 (this is the minimum bond), as security for the
protection from damage of the Council's infrastructure during the
construction of the development. The bond will be released once the
works are completed should no damage have occurred.
Advice: Once the certificate of occupancy/completion for the
development has been issued and/or the works are completed,
please contact the Council's Project and Development Inspector on
Author: Liz Wilson

- 22 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
telephone (03) 6238 2967 to arrange an inspection prior to the

release of the Councils Infrastructure Protection Bond.
To ensure the protection of the Council's infrastructure.
20. Prior to the issuing of any building permit/consent under the Building
Act 2000 (including demolition) or the commencement of works on
site (whichever occurs first), the owner must lodge with the Council a
comprehensive photographic record of the condition of the Councils
infrastructure (road surface, services, footpaths, kerb and gutter,
driveway crossovers and nature strips) at the road frontage to the
site and adjacent to the site.
Any damage to the Councils infrastructure during construction must
be repaired within 30 days to the satisfaction of Councils Director
City Infrastructure at the owners cost.
The photographic record will be relied upon to establish the extent of
any damage caused to the Council infrastructure during construction.
In the event that the owner fails to provide a pre-construction
photographic record of the site then any damage to the Council
infrastructure found on completion of works will be deemed to be the
responsibility of the owner and must be repaired within 30 days to the
satisfaction of the Councils Director City Infrastructure at the
developers cost.
Advice:
(i) The developer should take particular care to photograph any
pre-existing damage or defects to Council infrastructure at the
road frontage and adjacent to the site.
(ii)
Any damage to the Councils infrastructure during construction

must be reported to the Councils Project and Development
Inspector, on telephone (03) 62 382 967 within five working
days.

To ensure that any Council infrastructure and/or site-related
service connections affected by the proposal will be altered
and/or reinstated at the developers full cost.
B. The Council include the following advice to the applicant:
1.
Author: Liz Wilson
As approval is required for the use/development under the Building

Act 2000, approval of the working drawings is required prior to the
commencement of any works or the occupancy of the premises.

- 23 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
Author: Liz Wilson
20/7/2015
2.
An application for a plumbing permit must be lodged in accordance

with the Building Act 2000 and Tasmanian Plumbing Regulations
2014, and a permit issued prior to the commencement of any
plumbing work on site.
3.
The Council's Project and Development Inspector must be contacted

on telephone (03) 6238 2967 at least 24 hours prior to the
commencement of any work that requires inspection. The inspector
must be contacted to discuss the requirements for any new vehicle
crossovers and new stormwater connections.
4.
The footpath material must match existing footpath.
5.
Tasmanian Standard Drawings can be accessed on the Local

Government Association Tasmania web site: www.lgat.tas.gov.au.
6.
Prior to the commencement of any work within the road reservation

by a private contractor, the owner must obtain a road opening permit,
otherwise known as a permit to temporarily open up and occupy a
highway (pursuant to Section 46 of the Local Government
(Highways) Act 1982) for any privately undertaken works in the
highway reservation. This permit will include items such as hours of
work, road safety, reinstatement, etc. Note that an application form
and advice regarding the permit requirements can be found on the
Councils web site: www.hobartcity.com.au .
7.
Once a permit has been issued the owner must contact the Project
and Development Inspector on telephone (03) 6238 2967 at least 48
hours notice prior to the commencement of any works. Please note
completed applications for the permit must be accompanied by a
safe work method statement. Any queries should be directed to the
Councils Traffic Engineering Unit on telephone (03) 6238 2791.

- 24 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
8.
20/7/2015
Prior to any works commencing within the highway reservation a

license pursuant to the Council's by-laws must be obtained for the
use of the public footpath or road pavement/reservation during
construction for hoarding, scaffolding, signage, skip bins, cranes,
scissor lifts or other equipment in accordance with conditions to be
established by the Council.
Advice:Prior to contacting the Council please refer to the advice on
the Councils web page Work in the Road Reservation:
www.hobartcity.com.au
To apply for the relevant permit please submit completed application
forms to traffic@hobartcity.com.au or mail to the Councils Manager
Traffic Engineering Hobart City Council GPO Box 503 Hobart 7001.
Note that all applications for permits and licences must be
accompanied by a safe work method statement. Any queries should
be directed to the Councils Traffic Engineering Unit on telephone
(03) 6238 2791.
DEVELOPMENT APPRAISAL PLANNER

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.
(Leanne Lassig)
ACTING SENIOR STATUTORY PLANNER
Date of Report: 2 July 2015
Attachment(s) Attachment A Documents and Drawings List
Attachment B TasWater form Reference No. TWDA 2015/00791-HCC
Attachment C Documents and Drawings
Author: Liz Wilson

- 25 -
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Documents and Drawings that comprise

Planning Application Number - PLN-15-00590-01
DEVELOPMENT ADDRESS:
4 Gowrie Street and Adjacent Road

Reservation, New Town
LIST OF DOCUMENTATION:
Description
Drawing
Number/Revision/Author/Date,
Report Author/Date, Etc
Application form
Title
Consultant planners report
Attachment A (site photos)
Photo
Site/demolition plan
Site plan
Ground floor plan
First floor plan
Roof plan
Author: Liz Wilson
CT 3/5451
Author: Kate Loveday
Project No:
Drawing No: 01
Revision No: B
Drawn by: Ashton Keene
Associates
Date of Drawing: April 2015
Project No:
Drawing No: 02
Revision No: B
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 03
Revision No: B
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 04
Revision No: 0
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 05
Revision No: 0
Associates

- 26 -
Date of Lodgement
to Council
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
1/6/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
Elevations (north and south)
Elevations (east and west)
Private open space plan
Stormwater concept plan
Author: Liz Wilson
Project No:
Drawing No: 06
Revision No: 0
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 07
Revision No: 0
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 08
Revision No: B
Associates
Project No:
Drawing No: 09
Revision No:
Associates
Date of Drawing: May 2015

- 27 -
20/7/2015
15/5/15
15/5/15
15/5/15
1/6/15
File Ref: 5502683 P/4/531
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066
Web: www.taswater.com.au
Submission to Planning Authority Notice

Council
Planning Permit PLN-15-00590
No.
TasWater details
TasWater
TWDA 2015/00791-HCC
Reference No.
TasWater
Greg Clausen
Contact
Response issued to
Council notice
23/05/2015
date
Date of response 9 June 2015

Phone No. (03) 6237 8242
Council name HOBART CITY COUNCIL

Contact details Development@hobartcity.com.au
Development details
Address 4 GOWRIE ST, NEW TOWN
Property ID (PID)
5502683
Description of
Demolition + 2 new houses
development
Schedule of drawings/documents
Prepared by
Ashton Keane
Drawing/document No.
Ground Floor Plan (sheet 3)
Revision No.
B
Date of Issue
Apr 15
Conditions
SPAN DWELLING UNITS, CONNECTIONS, 56W, HEADWORKS
Pursuant to the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 (TAS) Section 56P(1) TasWater imposes the
following conditions on the permit for this application:
CONNECTIONS, METERING & SEWER DIVERSION
1.
The existing water connection must be upgraded to minimum 25mm ID with metered connections to each
dwelling unit of the development must be designed and constructed to TasWaters satisfaction and be in
accordance with any other conditions in this permit.
2.
Any removal/supply and installation of water meters and/or the removal of redundant and/or installation of new
and modified property service connections must be carried out by TasWater at the developers cost.
3.
Prior to TasWater issuing a Certificate(s) for Certifiable Work (Building) and/or (Plumbing), the sewer relocation
including the main and new manholes illustrated on the plan titled Ground Floor Plan must by carried out by
TasWater at the developers cost.
HEADWORKS
4.
Prior to TasWater issuing a Certificate(s) for Certifiable Work (Building) and/or (Plumbing), the applicant or
landowner as the case may be, must pay a headworks charge totalling $657.60 to TasWater for water
infrastructure for 0.6 additional Equivalent Tenements, indexed as approved by the Economic Regulator from
the date of this Submission to Planning Authority Notice until the date it is paid to TasWater
5.
landowner as the case may be, must pay a headworks charge totalling $2,416.00 to TasWater for sewerage
the date of this Submission to Planning Authority Notice until the date it is paid to TasWater.
Advice: If the Certificate for Certifiable Work is applied for in the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2016, then
the above headworks amount(s) will be waived in line with the prevailing State Government Policy. Please visit
www.development.tas.gov.au for further information.
DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT FEES

6.
The applicant or landowner as the case may be, must pay a development assessment fee to TasWater for this
Page 1 of 2
Template 04 Submission to Planning Authority Notice
Version 1.0 - June 2013
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066
proposal of $203.22 for development assessment as approved by the Economic Regulator and the fees will be
indexed as approved by the Economic Regulator from the date of the Submission to Planning Authority Notice
for the development assessment fee until the date they are paid to TasWater. Payment is required within 30
days from the date of the invoice.
Advice
For information on TasWater development standards, please visit
http://www.taswater.com.au/Development/Development-Standards
For information regarding headworks, further assessment fees and other miscellaneous fees, please visit
http://www.taswater.com.au/Development/Fees---Charges
For detailed information on how headworks have been calculated for this development please contact the TasWater
contact as listed above.
For application forms please visit http://www.taswater.com.au/Development/Forms
The developer is responsible for arranging to locate existing TasWater infrastructure and clearly showing it on any
drawings. Existing TasWater infrastructure may be located by TasWater (call 136 992) on site at the developers
cost, alternatively a surveyor and/or a private contractor may be engaged at the developers cost to locate the
infrastructure.
Declaration
The drawings/documents and conditions stated above constitute TasWaters Submission to Planning
Authority Notice.
If you need any clarification in relation to this document, please contact TasWater. Please quote the TasWater reference
number. Phone: 13 6992, Email: development@taswater.com.au
Authorised by
Jason Taylor
Development Assessment Manager
Page 2 of 2
CPC Agenda
4 Gowrie Street, New Town

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
DOCUMENT
This document is one of the documents
relevant to the application for a planning
permit No. PLN-15-00590-01 and was
received on 15 May 2015.
Planning Authority: Hobart City Council
2 Dwellings
Neighbourhood and Site Description
with Design Response
Kate Loveday B Arch

May 2015
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Kate Loveday Town Planning Consultant 1


Introduction
The City of Hobart Planning Scheme contains standards and criteria for dwellings in
Residential Zones in Schedule K. This Schedule requires by virtue of Clause K.2A that:
An application for 2 or more new dwellings on one site must be
accompanied by:
A neighbourhood and site description.
A design response.
This report has been prepared to fulfil the abovementioned requirement. The design
response is undertaken by addressing the specific standards of Schedule K in turn
and identifying the Acceptable Solutions and Performance Criteria that are satisfied.
Neighbourhood and Site Description

The subject site is known as 4 Gowrie Street, New Town. It is a generally L shaped
block in the centre of the street on the northern side of the road. It has an old brick
garage/shed abutting the street frontage in the centre of the site and is otherwise
vacant.
The site has previously been a wood yard called Gorringes; this use having
ceased many years ago.
Gowrie Street is a short residential street between Park Street and Burnside Avenue.
It has only two houses which it serves as the primary frontage: the neighbour to the
west being No. 9 Bishop Street (which is a house attached to a vacant shop which,
in turn, is on the corner with Bishop and Park Streets) and No. 1 Gowrie Street across
the road from the site.
Attachment A to this report provides photographs of the site and surroundings.
The neighbourhood is a residential suburb. It is characterised mostly by single
dwellings with some blocks of flats and some corner shops and churches that have
also been converted into dwellings.
The houses and other buildings are mostly post-war construction with some later
styles of houses and flats interspersed. It would appear that as the buildings are
basically sound and well-constructed, this has led to many renovations in the recent
past, with extensions and some modernisations. There are few vacant sites.
Houses are generally one and two storey with hipped roofs. They are mostly brick,
with some weatherboard and have varying roof styles, wall colours and finishes.
They are mostly set back from the street with a smaller front garden and a larger
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

back garden and there are driveways down the side of the blocks, with some
garages at the street frontage (mostly brick).
The streetscape is predominated by higher fences and hedges (due in part to the
established gardens in the area). There are some 1 metre fences but the majority
are over shoulder height(1.5 metres), brick construction or timber palings with
substantial hedges behind. Across the road from the subject site is one such hedge
at 33 Park Street. This is a dominant visual feature of Gowrie Street.
DOCUMENT
Figure 1: Site location
The area is characterised by:
Single dwellings (Post war)

Tree and hedge lined streets with high fences in both brick and timber.
Most properties have driveways and garages and parking for 1-2 cars.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
Figure 2: Site and immediate surrounds
The site has an area of 698 square metres. A copy of the title is included with this
application. There is an easement for services running generally through the centre
of the site under the existing shed.
Immediately adjacent to the site is a house attached at the rear of the shop on the
corner of 9 Bishop Street. This house is single storey with a small rear garden and
lean-to outbuildings adjacent to the subject site. The next neighbour to the northwest is a dwelling at No. 11 Bishop Street which has a modern rear extension
immediately adjacent to the site. It is also single storey. The rear garden of No. 11
Bishop Street extends along the northern boundary of the site to the central point of
the L. There is another rear garden to the north which is again for a single dwelling
being No. 22 Burnside Avenue. This has a boundary fence with trees and shrubs
along its length.
The final neighbour is No. 20 Burnside Avenue which is on the corner with Gowrie
Street. This has its rear garden abutting the subject site on the east and the
boundary is marked by a metal fence and shrubs.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
Figure 3: Title diagram for the subject site
The neighbourhood is well serviced. There are buses down Park Street. The site is
close to the supermarkets and other shops in New Town and there are a number of
schools nearby. The site is within easy commuting distance of the city and public
parks such as the Domain and Cornelian Bay. Generally, the level of amenity of the
area is high.
There are no heritage listed properties adjacent to the site, nor are there any
heritage areas. In the Draft City of Hobart Planning Scheme there will be some of
both nearby but not immediately adjacent.
Figure 3: Aerial view of site and surroundings
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
Figure 4 : The proposed Heritage Areas (HA) under the Draft Interim Planning Scheme - Note the subject site is not
adjacent to a proposed HA. No. 1 Gowrie Street across the road is to be heritage listed.
Proposal
The proposal involves two separate dwellings. Each is two storey with 3 bedrooms.
The living areas are on the ground floor and the bedrooms on the upper level. Each
dwelling has a garage for one car with a storage area included and additional
space adjacent to park a second vehicle.
The dwellings are both able to be accessed without steps into the ground level and
they have private gardens at the rear. The dwellings have their living areas generally
oriented to the north with the open space and patio/ deck areas extending into the
open spaces. The master bedrooms have a small deck also facing to the north or
north/east.
The floor area of each dwelling is:
East unit 165.6 square metres
West unit 158.75 square metres
The style of the dwellings is contemporary. To be consistent with this style and to
reduce physical bulk they have a low curved roof.
Details of materials, finishes and colours are included with the plans and elevations
submitted. The buildings will be of lightweight insulated construction, clad in a proprietry
cladding panel finished with a combination of principally textured coloured render and
areas of complimentary prefinished coloured feature panels.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
Design Response
Location / Context

The design provides two family homes in an established residential area. The layout
and position of the two new dwellings reflects that of the surroundings dwellings set
in a garden with rear open space, bedrooms on upper levels and living areas below
opening out into the gardens. Each dwelling has on-site parking.
Design Principles
The design principle is that both houses will be contemporary style with a modern
layout and the full range of facilities. This is commensurate with the surroundings
where the dwellings in the neighbourhood have been designed each for their
specific period and to the highest standard of the day for family houses of medium
large size.
The design does not mimic or reflect the older dwellings. This is not considered
necessary in this instance as the street is short, with no specific singular architectural
character and the two dwellings will not be prominent when viewed from Park Street
end or the Burnside Avenue approach. Both gardens enable landscaping to take
place around both houses and it is anticipated that with time, the gardens would
also blend with the surrounding area.
Access
The dwellings will both have access at ground level for the full extent of the ground
floor. There will be on-site parking and storage and open plan living area with open
plan dining and galley kitchen to ensure maximum flexibility.
Form / Scale / Bulk and Mass / Height
The dwellings have the same scale, bulk, general floor area and same general
height as surrounding buildings. They do not however mimic the form of adjacent
dwellings.
Materiality / Fenestration
The dwellings will have contemporary fenestration with the majority of glassed areas
on the north facades, at ground level. Upper windows have higher sill heights and
the balcony railings of the master bedrooms will be solid to ensure privacy with
appropriate screens.
Sustainability
The dwellings have been oriented north to provide year round comfort and sunlight
with smaller openings ensuring minimal heat loss on the south side. They will be fully
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

insulated. The gardens have sufficient area for drying of clothes, storage and any
desired gardening.
DOCUMENT
City of Hobart Planning Scheme

Schedule K: Design Elements

K.3.1 Residential Density
Intent:
To achieve a number and size of dwelling units in an area that are compatible with
the existing built and natural environment.
The site is within Residential Zone 1, Precinct 17 and under Acceptable Solution (AS)
1.2 the Dwelling Unit Factor for the area gives a permitted density for 2 dwellings as
760 m2 site area. The lot is 698 m2. This is a minor discretion in my opinion. The
performance criteria are therefore the applicable assessment criteria.
It would appear from the title that the site was created originally from the backyards
of the adjoining lots to the east and west both owned by the same person.
AS1.4 states that a lot shall have a maximum permitted site coverage of 30% in
Precinct 17. The footprint of the units is 118.2 m2 for the west unit and 120.8 m2 for
the east unit: a total of 148 m2. Site coverage proposed is 21 % and complies with
the permitted standard.
AS1.5 states that a minimum permitted percentage of 30% of the site area shall be
retained or developed as usable landscaped space(ULS).
The west unit has 152.6 m2 of ULS and the east unit has 199.6 m2 of ULS.
This gives a total of 352 m2.
The ULS in this development is 50% and complies with the Acceptable Solution.
Performance Criteria
PC1.1
The number and size of dwelling units are
to complement the built and natural
values of an area.
PC1.2
Existing dwelling units are to maintain a
curtilage that provides sufficient
separation to preserve residential
amenity.
PC1.3
Design Response
The footprint of each new dwelling is similar in
size to the surrounding dwellings in the area
(see the diagram/aerial view below). The
garden areas are smaller as is consistent with
modern standards where houses literally
take up less space and have easier more
manageable gardens.
The side and rear setbacks are greater than
the Scheme building envelope requires and
there is minimal hard surface surrounding the
houses so landscaping can be achieved.
The two dwellings will present their backyards
and outdoor living spaces at ground level to
the neighbouring houses backyards and
living areas also at ground level. This is a
compatible relationship preserving amenity.
The proposed two dwellings will easily be
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

The number and size of dwelling units
shall not exceed the capacity of the
current or intended community and/or
physical services of the area.
accommodated in an established residential

area that is well serviced. The proposal will
have no more impact than a large single
home.
PC1.5
Building form shall have regard to the
need to:
(a) minimise direct overlooking of the
main internal living areas and private
open spaces of neighbouring dwelling
units;
The proposed living areas are at ground level

and have a more than adequate setback
from rear and side boundaries. The two
neighbours in Burnside Avenue are protected
from any overlooking by extensive plantings
along the boundary and high fences. Both
plantings and fences will remain and will not
be impacted by the development.
The boundary fences to the adjacent Bishop
Street properties will also remain. As can be
seen from the photographs in Attachment A.
There is no overlooking into adjacent living
areas as these are oriented away from the
site itself. The private open spaces next door
in both cases are adjacent to the private
open spaces proposed on the site. This a
complimentary and reciprocal normal
suburban arrangement and with new
plantings in the gardens on the subject site
the privacy will be further improved.
DOCUMENT
(b) minimise any reduction in existing

winter sunlight to the principal area of
ground level living rooms and private
open space of neighbouring dwelling
units;
(c) minimize visual bulk in close proximity

to existing buildings;
(d) minimise noise intrusion to

neighbouring dwelling units;
The site is generally oriented with the street

frontage being the southern side. This means
that the two new houses are both to the
south of the rear gardens of the adjacent
dwellings to the north. This guarantees no loss
of sunlight to gardens or the living areas of 11
Bishop Street and No. 22 Burnside Avenue.
The western dwelling is set 4.7 metres at its
closest point from the dwelling at No.2
Gowrie Street so meeting the setback and
building envelope standards on this side. The
same is the case for the eastern neighbour
where there is a setback of a minimum of 3.9
metres also a compliance with the
standard.
The two dwellings will read in the
landscape in the same way as the
surrounding buildings as individual houses
surrounded by their own individual gardens.
They will be no higher or have greater bulk
than any of the two storey or single storey
homes with attic roofs in the area.
All living areas are at ground level and their
associated open space will have ample area
for landscaping. There will be the usual
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
(e) complement or enhance the

character of the neighbourhood.
20/7/2015

boundary fences between dwellings and no
adjacent screening landscaping on
neighbouring sites will be affected by the
construction. The decks off the master
bedrooms are small and designed to suit a
small table and chair setting. Both are well
within the building envelope the Scheme
requires and look over the adjacent roofs to
the distant views rather than into private living
areas.
The proposed two dwellings will complete a
blighted section of Gowrie Street, which has
remained under- developed and dis-used for
many years.
In conclusion the number of dwellings and density of building on site is compatible

with the surrounding built environment as is required by the Performance Criteria for
the Residential Density Standards of K.3.1.
K.3.2 Private Open Space

Intent:
To ensure that private open space provided for dwelling units is clearly defined,
useable and meets user requirements for privacy, access, outdoor activities and
landscaping.
AS2.1 states:
All houses and flats at ground floor level shall have a total area of 50m2 (in
one parcel) of Private Open Space with a minimum horizontal dimension of
5m. The private open space shall not be located primarily between the front
of the house and the street.
AS2.2 states:
All houses and flats shall have an outdoor living space directly accessible*
from a living room with a gradient that is not steeper than 1 in 20 and:(a) if at ground level have a minimum area of 25m2 and minimum horizontal
dimension of 3.5m;
The proposal meets the Acceptable Solution 2.2 and meets the area and position for
the Acceptable Solution 2.1. The minimum distance of 5 metres is not however met
and the Performance Criteria 2.1 to 2.5 must be assessed.
2.1- Private open space is clearly
defined for private use.
Proposal
The proposed open space for both
dwellings is at the rear and side of each
dwelling and is defined by the position of
the buildings and the proposed central
fencing.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
This document
one of the
documents
2.2 is
- Private
open
space areas are
of dimensions to suit the projected
requirements
received on 15 May 2015. of the occupants of
the dwelling unit, and to
Planning Authority:
Hobart Citysome
Counciloutdoor
accommodate
recreational needs as well as

providing space for service
functions.
2.3 - Part of the private open
space is capable of serving as an
extension of the dwelling unit for
relaxation, dining, entertaining,
recreation and childrens play, and
is accessible from a living room.
2.4 - Location of private open
space takes advantage of outlook
and the natural features of the
site; minimises adverse impact of
adjacent buildings on privacy and
overshadowing; and addresses
surveillance, privacy and security
issues where private open space
abuts public spaces.
2.5 - Orientation of private open
space helps to achieve
comfortable year-round use.
20/7/2015

The minimum 5 metre dimension is a
technical discretion in reality. The
outdoor spaces are more than adequate
in area to serve as gardens, childrens
play areas, drying areas and garden
storage as well as extensions of the living
areas.
Both gardens are immediately accessible
from living areas and good surveillance
from both kitchens to the open space for
childrens play is maintained.
As the buildings are to the south of the

site the open space is oriented to the
north so maximising sunlight and outlook
without affecting adjacent open spaces.
There are no security issues.
The private open space is oriented to the

north for both dwellings so achieving
maximum sunlight.
The performance criteria in respect of Private Open Space are therefore easily met
by the proposal.
K.3.3 Parking & Access

Intent:
To ensure adequate provision of secure and accessible on-site parking for residents
and visitors without unreasonably diminishing the residential amenity of the area.
The development provides 3 car spaces two in garages and one open space
adjacent between the two buildings. This is in compliance with the requirements of
AS 3.2 and the dimensions also meet the requirements of AS 3.1 and the access
requirements of AS 3.5.
AS3.4 states in part:
Garages, carports and car parking spaces fronting a street shall be set back behind
the alignment of the front facade,
The two garages are an integral part of the architecture of the buildings and
therefore would meet this standard in principle. If the 1 metre projection is
considered a non-compliance, it is a minor one which ensures the facades have
depth articulation. To set them back further would reduce open space and room
for services such as laundry and stairs etc.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

The performance criteria are considered to be met as there is no negative
streetscape impact. It is also not unusual in this locality for dwellings to have
garages built to the street frontage.
DOCUMENT

Intent:
on 15 May
2015.
To ensure that the height and setback of a building fromreceived
a boundary
maintains
K3.4 Building Setback and Bulk
appropriate residential scale and limits the impact on the amenity of neighbours
caused by overbearing appearance or unreasonable loss of daylight or sunlight.
The proposed two dwellings comply with the Acceptable Solutions 4.3 and 4.4 with
regard to setbacks. There is a minor non - compliance with the Building envelope of
AS 4.1 at the north-west corner of the eastern unit. It is similar in dimension to the
allowance that is made for eaves in AS 4.2 and would have no discernible impact
on sunlight or shadowing to the adjacent garden at No. 11 Bishop Street. The
Performance Criteria 4.2 is therefore met which states:
Minor encroachments beyond the building envelope shall not have any
detrimental impact on the amenity of adjoining properties.
The extent of the discretion is shown also on the roof plan. It is clearly a small portion
of the roof and eaves only.
PC4.1 states:
Buildings are to be designed and sited such that there is no unreasonable loss
of amenity to the residents of adjacent dwellings caused by overbearing
appearance, loss of daylight or sunlight.
The eastern unit is stepped back from No. 11 Bishop Street from its closest point
where the discretion occurs. It is fully surrounded by garden area and will obviously
be landscaped. There will be no loss of daylight or sunlight to the house itself which
is over 9 metres away. The garden area may have some overshadowing in the
mornings only over the south east corner. This is not the primary area of the private
open space adjacent and would not be overshadowed by mid-day. PC 4.1 is
therefore met in my opinion.
K3.5 Streetscape and Street Setback

Intent:
To contribute towards attractive streetscapes and security for occupants and
passers-by, ensure adequate open space in front of dwellings and provide an
attractive setting for buildings.
AS 5.3 states:
In established areas, new buildings may have a minimum setback from the
street boundary up to 25% less than that of an adjacent development, unless
they are within a Heritage Area identified in Schedule F of this Scheme, in
which case setbacks shall match that of an adjacent development.
The proposed development complies with this as the existing setbacks on this side of
Gowrie Street are minimal to zero. The proposed dwellings will provide small front
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015

garden
areas
fordocuments
landscaping consistent with the general form of the area but with
This document
is one
of the
relevant less
to the
application
for
planning
maintenanceathan
previously required in the past.
receivedAS5.5
on 15 May
2015.
states:
Front
boundary
fences and walls shall be no more than 1.8m high and that
Planning Authority:
Hobart
City Council
part of the wall or fence greater than 1m in height shall have openings which
make it not less than 50% transparent.
Front fences and walls and hedges are characteristic of the area. The proposal
achieves a similar result without providing the actual separate entity being a
fence. The front facades of the two buildings are articulated to have a modern
interpretation, showing the way to the front door with a screen, ramp and entry
porch. The standard is met and no front fences are proposed.
K3.6 Privacy
Intent:
To ensure that dwellings are sited and designed to provide visual and acoustic
privacy for residents and their neighbours in their dwellings.
There are no habitable room windows within 9 metres of the proposed eastern
dwelling. It therefore complies with AS 6.1 and AS 6.2. The upper level deck of the
eastern house is set less than 5 metres from the eastern boundary for part of its
length. Screening to this deck in accordance with AS 6.3 is shown on the plans.
The western house also has a small section of the adjacent house at 11 Bishop Street
that is within 9 metres. This is shown on Site Plan drawing 02. This is the back corner
of the new extension at No. 11 and a photograph below shows this area. It is a
blank wall for the most part and a portion of a small side window that does not look
directly over the new western house, but rather towards the existing hose at No. 2
(back of 9 Bishop Street). The Performance Criteria of 6.1 and 6.2 are considered to
be met.
Figure 5: View of No. 11 Bishop Street side wall and area within 9 metres of new dwelling on site
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

The upper level deck of the master bedroom of the western house is set 4 metres
from the boundary. The plans show a 25% obscure glazed upstand 200mm high on
the top of a solid balustrade so achieving a screening to 1200mm high is shown in
accordance with AS 6.3.
The relationship to the rear of No. 2 Gowrie Street is shown on the following
photograph and plan 02. The new western house will be set generally over the 9
metres distance specified from the house at N0.2 however where the living room
projects to meet the garden a small area reduces this distance to approximately 8
metres. This correlates with the window shown on the photograph below which is
slightly elevated above the level of the new house.
DOCUMENT
Figure 6: No. 2 Gowrie Street rear facade
There is therefore screen planting shown on the plans ensuring no privacy issues
result. The proposal therefore complies with PC 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3.
Statement of Desired Future Character for the Precinct

5.7 THE RESIDENTIAL 1 ZONE
(Use Schedule A - Zone Reference 6)
The Objective of the Residential 1 Zone is to sustain and enhance the
character and amenity of established residential areas with diverse dwellingtypes with minimal intrusion or further development of non-residential uses not
necessary to serve local residents.
The East New Town Precinct - No. 17
5.7.2 The Precinct should continue as an inner urban residential area
consisting principally of single detached houses set mainly on small to
standard size allotments. Changes of use of existing buildings to flats and
accommodation hostels may be permitted in appropriate locations close to
institutional uses and Risdon Road and New Town Road. Commercial
activities will generally be restricted to existing non-conforming uses or be
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

allowed on the scale of a domestic business. However, local shops may be
permitted in conjunction with an existing residential use where there is a lack
of such facility in the vicinity.
The proposed two dwellings will enhance the amenity of the established residential
area and with minimal intrusion to their immediate neighbours. The dwellings are of
a standard of finish and design commensurate with the high quality of their
surroundings and todays standards of living. They are wholly consistent with the
Objectives of the Residential 1 Zone and the Statement of Desired Future Character
for the East New Town Precinct.
Principles of Development Control

All the Principles of Development Control of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme are
met and there is no additional need for further conditions to modify the design or
ameliorate any impacts in my opinion.
Conclusion
The proposed two dwellings will repair a long blighted site in the established
residential area. They are compatible in scale and form with their surroundings while
having individual modern design and architectural expression.
The discretions requested under the Scheme are minor and do not have any
discernible impact on the amenity of any adjacent property. The Performance
Criteria in all instances are met by the proposal.
The design proposed responds to the established residential area with high quality
construction and finishes. The form of the houses is modern as were the surrounding
houses when they were built in their time. The two dwellings do not obstruct views or
vistas from any public area or adjacent site and are generally to the south of
neighbouring properties, so having minimal shadowing impacts.
I commend the proposal to Council. Please contact me if any further consultation is
required.
Kate Loveday B Arch

14 May 2015
DOCUMENT
.19
0
0.2
Shed eaves are

240mm over
boundary, cut
back & make
good roof
.16
53 ves
ea
es
av
building envelope
.1
50
3e
building envelope
49 500
50
6M
50
0
0.2
.12
.57
49
.88
.88
49
49
.71
49
49
.76
37 585
.63
49
existing bo
un
dary fence
.34
.17
49.07
37 585
remove private
power pole
1:100
Apr '15
01 / B
scale
date
sheet / rev
50
699m
Lot 3
2
7.6
47
47
12 95
4
.20
48
.17
48
remove street fences & gates 48.1
.81
47
remove existing footpath to

form new vehicular access &
reinstate as required
remo
v
build e existing
ing
breakout kerb for new

vehicle crossover
.00
.01
49
49
remove e
xisting
weighbrid
ge
257 25' 00"
49
.04
49
48 50
GOWRIE STREET
49
.37
49
0
9.4
IRS Pty Ltd

Gowrie St town houses
Site / Demolition Plan
DOCUMENT
drawing
project
client

aka.hbt @ bigpond.com
Tasmania 7007
outline of proposed West dwelling
25 215
remove street fences & gates
1
9.7
263 53" 3
0"
T (03) 6225 0586
299 Nelson Road, Mount Nelson,
Project + Construction Managers + Consultants
Ashton Keene Associates

building envelope
46
50
0
nail in
crossover
RL 47.93
F
g bou
ndary
fence
.69
47
.64
.67
47
47
edg
.55
47
.22
46
outline of proposed
East dwelling
existi
n
es
30"
eo
f ex
istin
gb
u sh
90 32
'
. 12
47
45
. 03
47
.54
45
.58
.4
46
building envelope 'H'
.11
46
15 2 4
0
.25
49
.23
remove dwarf concrete wall
50
revisions
.22
49
c This document is copyright and the sole property of Keene Consulting Pty Ltd
and can only be used in accordance with the terms of engagement, and may not
be copied, used or reproduced in any form without prior written authorisation.
crete wall
remove dwarf con
g
existin
Exist
ing
Sewe
r,
lo
c
a
tion b
ased
on
T
a
s
Wate
r info
ng bo
unda
ry fen
ce
existi
Ex
is
t
in
Sewe g
r
sion
diver
sewe
r afte
r
fence
rmatio
n
0 45
' 00"
north
44' 0
0"
15 443 B
remo
ve
49
180
346 53' 00"
dary
48
boun
existi
ng
of b
atte
r
top
46
22 34
5
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
9m from ground floor

building line
1300
6380
2270
257 25' 00"
4230
1260
15 443
2
3900
5
6M
14403
diverted sewer
2415
8100
3580
4470
15 24
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
drawing
project
client
IRS Pty Ltd

Site Plan
02 / B
Apr '15
1:200
north
sheet / rev
date
scale
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
STREET
revisions
GOWRIE
cloak
pantry
2540
9000
' 30"
90 32
9m from first floor

building line
37 585
25 215
510
263 53" 3
0"
13200
4116
9m from ground floor

building line
0 45
' 00"
1500
12 95
4
1300
4615
6380
1260
13200
3143
22 34
44' 0
0"
180
346 53' 00"
2840
CPC Agenda
screen
paving
263 53" 3
0"
ax 3000 high
257 25' 00"
screening m
glazed roof over
vegatation
37 585
Library / Study
Living
TV
346 53' 00"
15 443
Dining
UP
island bench
garden
Entry
Kitchen
6M
WC
cloak
pantry
wo
ref
Garage
Laundry
m
e
as
re
e
ew
2500
sewer easement
new
MH
Visitor parking
6000 x 2750
screen
t
en
new
MH
revisions
new
MH
Store
paving
Service Area
Landscaped privacy &

seperation screening
between dwellings
12 95
4
0 45
' 00"
paving
Garage
UP
grated drain
cloak
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007

Dining
Living
drawing
project
client
Laundry
Kitchen
RL 47 500
island bench
Entry
Library / Study
glazed roof over
Store
WC
Service Area
up
decking
IRS Pty Ltd

Ground Floor Plan
screen
garden
TV
BBQ
decking
03 / B
Apr '15
1:100
north
sheet / rev
date
scale
RL 49 000
grated drain
BBQ
25 215
ramp
down
screen
ramp
up
existin
g sew
er
Sewer relocated route

ramp
down
15 24
0
DOCUMENT
ramp
down
90 3 2
' 30 "
22 34
180
44' 0
0"
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Glass
roof below
Ensuite
Bedroom 1
Deck
linen
robe
Entry roof below
UP
open to below
linen
robe
6M
Garage roof below
revisions
Bath
UP
Entry roof below
Bath
linen
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
drawing
project
client
Deck
IRS Pty Ltd

First Floor Plan
Bedroom 3
robe
Bedroom 2
Bedroom 1
robe
RL 50 200
robe
Garage roof below
r
ed
laz
er
f ov
roo
robe
Bedroom 3
linen
Ensuite
Glass
roof below
04 / 0
Apr '15
1:100
north
sheet / rev
date
scale
zed
gla
RL 51 700
Bedroom 2

DOCUMENT
ver
o
oof
open to below
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Glass
roof below
Deck
6M
revisions
Garage roof below
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
drawing
project
client
Glass
roof below
Entry roof below
Garage roof below
Extent of dwelling
exceeding the building
envelope
IRS Pty Ltd

Roof Plan
Deck
sheet / rev
date
scale
05 / 0
Apr '15
1:100
Entry roof below

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
boundary
NSL
screen
RL 49 000
NSL
RL 51 700
building envelope 'A'

for South elevation
of West dwelling
Scale: 1:100
South Elevation
Scale: 1:100
North Elevation

for North elevation
of East dwelling
Applied coloured render

finish to dwelling
colour 'Off White'
RL 50 200
6M
NSL
Visitor parking
6000 x 2750
screen beyond
relocated
sewer
screen beyond
5430
6300
revisions
Extent of dwelling
envelope
boundary
building envelope 'J'

for South elevation
of East dwelling
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
200
1000
drawing
project
client
RL 50 200
screen
NSL
sheet / rev
date
scale
RL 47 500

IRS Pty Ltd

North & South Elevations

for North elevation
beyond
RL 49 000
DOCUMENT
RL 51 700
blind panel
25% obscure glazed

upstand to solid
balustrade - typical
boundary
building envelope 'E'

for North elevation
of East dwelling
06 / 0
Apr '15
1:100
NSL
boundary
RL 47 500
1120
B'
e'
p
lo n
ve tio
en leva ng
g
e lli
in
ild rth we
bu r No st d
fo We
of
1020
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
screen
Nth boundary
NSL
840
RL 47 500
Scale: 1:100
Scale: 1:100
West Elevation
RL 47 500
RL 50 200
Extent of East dwelling

envelope
East Elevation
building envelope 'F' for

Nth-West elevation of
East dwelling
NSL
6M
NSL
boundary
NSL
RL 51 700
NSL
building envelope 'G' for

Nth-East elevation of
East dwelling
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
4670
drawing
project
client
DOCUMENT
IRS Pty Ltd

East & West Elevations
sheet / rev
date
scale

1250
RL 49 000
NSL
boundary
NSL
07 / 0
Apr '15
1:100
20/7/2015
building envelope 'D'

for East elevation of
West dwelling
building envelope 'C'

for West elevation of
West dwelling
BBQ
revisions
NSL
blind panel
West dwelling beyond
ing be
NSL East dwell
yond
RL 49 000
boundary
CPC Agenda
6M
revisions
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
drawing
project
client
IRS Pty Ltd

Private Open Space Plan
199.6 sq.m.
08 / B
Apr '15
1:100
north
sheet / rev
date
scale
152.25 sq.m.

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
.20
49
49
.88
8
9.8
1
9.7
49
.76
49
.71
.37
4
9.3
49
7
9.1
UP
1
9.0
.00
new
MH
2500
47
.81
en
t
new
MH
New SW
kerb outlet
permiable hardstand
Visitor parking
6000 x 2750
sewer easement
revisions
remove
existing
kerb outlet
er
ew
em
s
ea
new
MH
50
0
7
8.1
48
.15
UP
grated surface drain
.67
.69
47
47
T (03) 6225 0586
Tasmania 7007
drawing
project
client
RL 47 500
Ashton
Keene Associates47.64
.20
48
2
7.6
47
50
46
47
.12
47
.11
45
.58
45
.54
09
May '15
1:100
New SW
kerb outlet
46
north
sheet / rev
date
scale
.03
exposed SW wall fixed

invert nom 47 280
IRS Pty Ltd

Stormwater Concept
.22
20/7/2015
6M
49
48
50
0
0.2
3
9.6
grated surface drain
RL 49 000
48 50
47
up
46
9
0.1
50
.23
.22
49 500
49
49
Stormwater drain
Surface drain
Sub-surface drain
ramp
up
Gully pit
Sewer relocated route
0 45
' 00"
4
12 95
Rain Water Pipe
ramp
down
DOCUMENT
received on the 01 June 2015.
ramp
down
Legend, stormwater concept
ramp
down
g sew
er
existin
r
of b
to p
46
atte
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
6.

6.1

SCHEME 1982
6.1.2
361-365 SANDY BAY ROAD (ALSO KNOWN AS 7-9 QUORN

STREET), SANDY BAY PARTIAL DEMOLITION,
EXTENSIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO EDUCATIONAL
ESTABLISHMENT PLN-15-00398-01
FILE REF: 7692409 & P/361-365/820
74xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
APPLICATION UNDER CITY OF HOBART PLANNING SCHEME 1982

Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
11 August 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00398-01
Address:
361-365 Sandy Bay Road (Also Known as 7-9 Quorn

Street), Sandy Bay
Applicant:
Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, 224 Murray Street, Hobart
Proposal:
Partial Demolition, Extensions and Alterations to

Educational Establishment
Representations:
14
Discretion:
Use, Density, Height, Heritage
Executive Summary
The Mount Carmel College complex extends from Sandy Bay Road to Quorn Street, with a
smaller frontage onto Nelson Road, Sandy Bay.
The application relates particularly to two buildings fronting onto Quorn Street, and which
are known as 7-9 Quorn Street, Sandy Bay.
The proposal involves demolition of 9 Quorn Street (called the Whitehouse or Erehwon)
and demolition of the chapel portion of 7 Quorn Street (called Providence House). The
demolished buildings will be replaced with an integrated structure attached to the
remaining section of Providence House, and which will accommodate office space for staff
and new classroom and teaching facilities for grade 7 and 8 students.
No increase in the number of staff or students is proposed.
After demolition, the work will be built in two stages. Stage 1 is a new two-storey extension
replacing the chapel wing of Providence House and internal work to convert the rest of the
building into a learning space and staff facilities for grade 7 and 8 students. Stage 2 is a
two storey building on the vacant 9 Quorn Street site. The two buildings will be connected,
with teaching areas on the upper floor and a dance studio and kitchenette on the ground
floor.
Fourteen (14) representations were received during the statutory advertising period.
The proposal generates discretion under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982
associated with use, density, height and heritage.
The proposal is recommended for refusal.
Author: Liz Wilson
361-365 Sandy Bay Road (Also Known as 7-9 Quorn Street)
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site and location

Quorn Street is an established residential street, characterised by: large, two storey
dwellings, often with gables; established and well tended front gardens; high front fences;
and, mature street trees. The two subject buildings (7 and 9 Quorn Street) fit within this
streetscape and look as if they are two residential dwellings, rather than part of a larger
school complex.
The broader local area is characterised by a mixture of uses: dwellings, educational
establishments (Mt Carmel College, University of Tasmania and Hutchins), sports fields
and Wrest Point Casino.
Fig. 1. Subject site
Fig. 2. The Whitehouse (9 Quorn Street) to be demolished
Author: Liz Wilson

-2-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 3. Providence House (7 Quorn Street)
Fig. 4. The chapel section of Providence house is proposed to be demolished
Zoning and Precinct

The property is located within precinct 30B of the residential 2 Zone, City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982.
Clause 5.8 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states that the objective of the
residential 2 zone is as follows:
The Objective of the Residential 2 Zone is to sustain and enhance the character and
amenity of areas of predominantly detached houses, with limited development of
complementary dwelling-types and minimum intrusion or further development of nonresidential uses not necessary to serve local residents.
Author: Liz Wilson

-3-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Clause 5.8.7 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states that the statement of
desired future character for precinct 30B is as follows:
The Precinct should continue to be characterised by predominantly single family
detached houses supported by a limited number of medium density housing
developments and a range of small local shops. Further development of offices and
non-local shops should be discouraged.
The environmental character of the Precinct should be derived from the existing high
quality of development and the mature gardens of the many early residences.
The beaches and waterfront between Sandy Bay Point and Wrest Point should be
accessible to the Public.
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
The proposal involves demolition of 9 Quorn Street (called the Whitehouse or Erehwon)
and demolition of the chapel portion of 7 Quorn Street (called Providence House). The
demolished buildings will be replaced with an integrated structure attached to the
remaining section of Providence House, and which will accommodate office space for staff
and new classroom and teaching facilities for grade 7 and 8 students.
No increase in the number of staff or students is proposed.
After demolition, the work will be built in two stages. Stage 1 is a new two-storey extension
replacing the chapel wing of Providence House and internal work to convert the rest of the
building into a learning space and staff facilities for grade 7 and 8 students. Stage 2 is a
two storey building on the vacant 9 Quorn Street site. The two buildings will be connected,
with teaching areas on the upper floor and a dance studio and kitchenette on the ground
floor.
Background
The house at 9 Quorn Street was granted a planning permit to be used by the school in
1987 under application number 870395 (change of use to educational establishment).
Three conditions and one piece of advice were placed on the permit:
1.
The use not being detrimental to the amenity of adjacent residential properties
by reason of noise emanating from the site.
2.
The existing building and front garden as viewed from the street are to retain
their current residential appearance.
3.
The interior of the building is to be restricted to office, resource and specialist

usage.
Author: Liz Wilson

-4-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Advice: That the applicant be advised that the Corporations approval of the change
of use of the building at 9 Quorn Street has been strongly influenced by the
undertaking of the school that no further school buildings will be erected on the land
known as 9 Quorn Street, that the rear yard will remain as a green space play area
and that the Corporation is not likely to approve of additional school buildings on the
land.
The Principal of Mt Carmel gave the following written undertaking at the time:
To allay any fears that residents may have in respect to property values and
continuity of the pleasant general environment that is very much part of the area, the
following points are made in respect to future usage:
The building will retain its current external appearance.
Interior of building will be used for some administrative purposes and resource
and specialist areas
Rear garden in due course will be used as an extension of the playground.
Noise level will continue to be maintained at an acceptable level.
Enrolments will not increase as a result of the purchase.
The school is within its rights to apply for a planning permit that is different to the one
lodged previously. As this permit pre-dates the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act
1993, the building has existing use rights to be used as an educational establishment.
Discretion
Discretion
Planning Scheme Requirement
Proposed
Use
Educational establishment is a
discretionary use in the
residential 2 zone.
The new building is to

be used as part of the
existing educational
establishment.
Density
Plot ratio 0.4
Plot ratio 0.42
Height
4.8 metres
5.1 metres
Heritage
Use and development on places

that are listed under Schedule F
of the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982 is discretionary.
The proposal is on a
listed site.
Author: Liz Wilson

-5-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Representations
Fourteen (14) representations were received during the statutory advertising period.
Concerns Raised
Planning Response
Demolition / character of the area / building

These issues are discussed in the body
of the report. Broadly, the concerns of
design:
the representors are agreed with.
7 and 9 Quorn Street are integral to the
character of the area.
The extension to 7 Quorn Street will
destroy its integrity.
9 Quorn Street is a fine Arts and Crafts
building and should not be demolished.
The height, form, bulk, scale and site
coverage of the new building is
inconsistent with the Objective of the
Residential 2 Zone and the Statement of
Desired Future Character for Precinct 30B.
The new building will negatively impact on
streetscape.
The materials of the new building do not
reflect the materials in the streetscape and
the design is poorly articulated.
Overlooking:
The new building will impact upon privacy.
This is discussed in the body of the

report.
Traffic and parking:

The proposed changes will result in a
significant increase in the number of
students and staff at the Quorn Street side
of the school and this will lead to traffic
congestion.
The proposal will not increase the

number of students or staff at the
school, and there is no evidence to
suggest that it will lead to increased
traffic congestion in Quorn Street,
Sandy Bay.
No additional onsite car parking spaces
need to be provided, and the proposal
complies with the parking and access
provisions in the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982.
Use:
The use of the building as an educational
establishment is not a use not necessary
to serve local residents.
See discussion under use in the body of

this report.
Hours of operation / use of the dance studio

after hours:
The proposal to use the studio up until
10pm would have a negative impact on
residential amenity in the vicinity.
After consultation with the applicant, this

element has been removed from the
proposal.
Author: Liz Wilson

-6-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
Heritage:
The proposal is detrimental to the heritage
values of the Mt Carmel site (particularly
the building known as Lauramont which is
within the site) and the heritage values of 2
Quorn Street.
20/7/2015
The Councils cultural heritage officer

has assessed the proposal against the
heritage values of Lauramont. There is
no discretion in relation to 2 Quorn
Street as this property is not adjacent to
the subject site.
The report of the Councils cultural

The history of Erehwon should be provided heritage officer goes into some detail
by the applicant so that its heritage value
about the history of both buildings, and
can be properly considered.
finds that they have historical and
streetscape significance.
The $4.1 million proposed to be spent on
construction could be used to reconfigure the
existing buildings and add an extension to the
rear, thus keeping the streetscape intact.
They could construct the middle years centre
elsewhere on the site.
It is noted that there are any number of

design possibilities that could be
proposed that would retain the existing
buildings as much as possible.
Construction will result in the removal of a

mature garden.
Not a ground for refusal.
The proposal is disrespectful to the nuns,

their purpose and their history.
No comment; not a planning issue.
The gap between the buildings will be

removed and views towards the Derwent
River obscured.
Mt Carmel is disingenuous in lodging the

planning application before the introduction of
the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015
under which they will be located in a heritage
area.
Proper consultation with neighbours should
have been undertaken prior to lodgement.
I am open to engaging with Mt Carmel in a
non-litigious environment so that my
concerns, and the concerns of others in the
community can be heard, and a different,
more acceptable design put to Council.
Consultation
The applicant was advised of the number of representations, and the basis of their
objections. In response to the concerns, the applicant decided to withdraw the element of
the proposal relating to the extended after hours use of the dance studio, and confirmed
that there will be no change to the existing operating hours of Mount Carmel College.
Delegation
As more than three representations were received, delegation rests with the Council.
Author: Liz Wilson

-7-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Appraisal
i.
Use
The use of land for an educational establishment is discretionary within the residential 2
zone. The use of the property as a school predates the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982. The applicant is proposing to use the new building as part of the school. The
applicant has stated that the development will not result in an increase in staff or student
numbers. The proposal is for an increase in floor area for the existing approved use,
demolition, and a change in the building form from two buildings to one, integrated
structure.
Clause 2.3.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states:
Before granting or refusing approval for any development or imposing conditions in
respect of any development the Council shall have regard to:
(a)
The Principles;
(b)
The Desired Future Character of the Precinct in which the development is

situated;
(c)
The provisions of any relevant Schedule and/or Code;
(d)
Any valid representation received in relation to an application for which

Section 57 of the Act applies;
(e)
Furthering the objectives of Schedule One of the Act;
(f)
The Zone Objectives;
Non-compliance with the zone objective and statement of desired future character has
been raised as a ground of objection by the representors.
The statements of desired future character and zone objectives do not, of themselves,
sustain a refusal of a development application. The Resource Management and Planning
Appeal Tribunal noted in the case of Arnold v Hobart City Council ([2013] TASRMPAT 15)
that the zone objective looks at an area in a strategic sense, rather than on a case by
case basis and that the desired future character statement is concerned with broader
strategic considerations.
Mt Carmel College was established in 1947 and so predates the coming into effect of the
City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 by some 44 years. The drafting of both the zone
objective and statement of desired future character in the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982 was undertaken with the knowledge of this established non-residential use within the
zone.
Author: Liz Wilson

-8-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Clause 5.8 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states that the objective of the
residential 2 zone is as follows:
This clause has two main considerations: whether the proposal in a general sense
sustains and enhances the character and amenity of areas of predominantly detached
houses; and whether there is minimum intrusion or further development of non-residential
uses not necessary to serve local residents.
The representors are very concerned about demolition of the buildings, and would like
them to be retained.
The consultant planner has written:
Efforts have been taken to ensure that the form and scale of development is
mitigated to reflect the domestic scale and character of the surrounding residences.
In other words: large two storey structures with prominent roofs and gables; set back
from the street in established mature gardens. Further design details have been
incorporated to reduce the potential bulk and scale of the new development with
articulated roof forms and recessive masonry panelling.....Although the proposal is
new and therefore different to what is currently on site, it is sympathetic to the form
and scale of development in the locality.
Character
The two existing buildings have a combined frontage of around 41 metres (this includes
the width of the garage at 7 Quorn Street). The proposed building will also have a frontage
of 41 metres. In simple terms, the major points of difference are: there will no longer be a
gap between the buildings; the building replacing 7 Quorn Street is higher, bulkier and two
storeys across the entire facade; and, the new building does not look like two single,
detached houses.
It is not an expectation under the zone objective that replacement buildings be exactly the
same as existing buildings. The buildings are replaced with buildings of a similar, but
certainly not identical, scale and form (that is, two storeys with gabled ends). The
replacement building is considerably larger and bulkier, and looks more like an institutional
building than a house. The zone objective should be used when considering the particular
discretions that relate to an application, and the relationship between the design of the
proposed building and the character of the area is discussed further in the density section
of this report.
Amenity
The residential amenity of the area is unaffected: as the use remains the same, so does
the degree of impact on the amenity of neighbours. There is no change proposed to the
hours of operation, the number of students or the number of staff. The proposal to use the
dance studio after hours has been removed from the application.
Author: Liz Wilson

-9-
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The second element of the statement of desired future character deals with further
development of non-residential uses.
Further development of non-residential uses
The school is an established non-residential use, and both 7 and 9 Quorn Street are
currently used for school purposes. Neither are used as houses despite the fact that they
look as if they are. . The continued use of the buildings, or the use of new buildings for
school purposes, does not change the balance of residential use currently found along this
part of Quorn Street, Sandy Bay. The non-residential educational use was established
before the implementation of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, will continue
under the proposal, and the proposal will not change the way in which the site is used.
The broad strategic considerations found within the zone objective in respect of use, that
is, minimum intrusion or further development of non-residential uses not necessary to
serve local residents is met by the proposal.
The statement of desired future character for precinct 30B is as follows:
This statement is concerned with broad strategic considerations for the area; that is, that
the area should continue to be dominated by detached houses with a limited number of
denser housing and some local shops, and that the character of the area should be
derived from the existing high quality of development and mature gardens of many of the
early residences.
In terms of use, the proposal does not alter the dominance of single detached houses in
the immediate area. Neither 7 nor 9 Quorn Street are currently used as houses; no
buildings being currently used as houses are being demolished as part of the proposal.
The proposal instead removes from the streetscape two buildings which have the form of
houses. Despite their use, they do not look like part of the school, and to the casual
observer, apart from the school bus parked in the driveway, they could easily be
interpreted as houses, particularly number 9. The existing high quality of houses set in
large, mature gardens elsewhere in the street remains and is unaffected by the proposal,
however numbers 7 and 9 will be replaced with a structure that no longer looks like a
house. It no longer looks like the single detached house set within a garden which is
encouraged by the statement of desired future character. It looks like a large, conjoined,
institutional building and would be unlikely to be read by the casual observer as a large
house. It does, however, retain a front garden. The proposal does not introduce higher
density housing or a new non-residential use.
The proposal is considered to be consistent with the statement of desired future character
in terms of use; however this statement should be used as a guide when assessing all of
the discretions relating to the proposal, and this is discussed further in the report below.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 10 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The zone objective and statement of desired future character do not sustain a refusal in
their own right. They provide guidance when assessing discretions under the provisions of
the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. If an application was otherwise permitted, it
could not be refused because it did not comply with the zone objective or statement of
desired future character. The statement and objective can only be used in so far as they
apply to the discretion being assessed.
It is not considered that the statement and objective can be relied upon to sustain a refusal
of the application based on its discretionary use status.
iii.
Density
The permitted (basic) plot ratio for non-residential uses in the Residential 2 Zone of the
City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 is 0.4. The current floor area across the site is
5629m2 and the site area is 15,510m2, giving an existing plot ratio of 0.362. The proposed
development will increase floor area to 6492m2, which is a plot ratio of 0.42. The permitted
floor area is 6204m2. The proposal exceeds this by 288m2.
Clause B.11.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states:
In the Residential 1 to 4 Zones any development which exceeds the basic plot ratio
shall only be approved where Council is satisfied that the criteria in Schedule K
PC1.5 are met.
Clause PC1.5 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states:
Building form shall have regard to the need to:
(a)
minimise direct overlooking of the main internal living areas and private open
spaces of neighbouring dwelling units;
(b)
minimise any reduction in existing winter sunlight to the principal area of

ground level living rooms and private open space of neighbouring dwelling
units;
(c)
minimise visual bulk in close proximity to existing buildings;
(d)
minimise noise intrusion to neighbouring dwelling units; and
(e)
complement or enhance the character of the neighbourhood.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 11 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
With regard to the above:

(a)
Minimise direct overlooking into the main internal living areas and private open space
of neighbouring dwelling units:
5 Quorn Street:
5 Quorn Street is to the south-east of the section of the site that is the subject of the
application, and is adjacent to 7 Quorn Street (Providence House). On this side, the
ground floor boardroom, kitchen and toilets will be converted into a learning space. A
10.7 metre long extension is proposed, sited 4.155 metres from the side boundary
and also to be used as a learning space. New windows are proposed, whilst others
are filled in with brickwork. On the upper level, the existing staff offices will be
converted into a staff workroom, and an extension will be placed over the new
learning space downstairs.
The house at 5 Quorn Street is sited towards the front of the lot, and is adjacent to
the existing Providence House building. The 10.7 metre long two-storey extension is
adjacent to their rear garden. Privacy concerns have been raised about the proximity
of the extension to this property, and in particular the impact on the propertys private
garden and living spaces.
The ground floor windows would not unreasonably impact upon the privacy of the
neighbouring property as they would be largely shielded by the neighbours
outbuilding on the fence line, the boundary fence and the existing vegetation.
If the planning permit is granted, the upper level window in the extension should be
conditioned to be a highlight window so that it does not impact upon the privacy of
the neighbouring property. Light into this room can still be sourced from the large
north-east (rear) facing windows.
11 Quorn Street:
11 Quorn Street is to the north-west of the site and is adjacent to 9 Quorn Street (the
Whitehouse). 9 Quorn Street is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a twostorey building. On the ground floor facing this neighbour will be a dance studio,
kitchenette/common room and covered terrace outdoor learning area. On the upper
floor will be two learning spaces and a sitting/locker area.
Concerns have also been raised about the impact on this neighbour, in particular that the
size of the building will be overbearing and privacy will be compromised.
The applicant has stated that the windows on the north-western elevation will be highlight
windows to prevent overlooking, and will be augmented where necessary with screening
and plantings. The upper level office in the existing building currently has a clear view into
the neighbours swimming pool. The proposed extension will have a section of wall
extended beyond the new window to provide screening to the neighbouring property, and
so will reduce the level of overlooking to less than which is currently experienced by the
neighbour.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 12 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 5. Existing side wall of 11 Quorn Street
Fig. 6. Current view from deck at rear of 9 Quorn Street towards 11 Quorn Street.
(b)
Minimise any reduction in existing winter sunlight to the principle area of ground level
living rooms and private open space of neighbouring dwelling units:
5 Quorn Street
The existing wall of Providence House is set back between 1.7 metres and 2.0
metres from the side boundary with 5 Quorn Street, Sandy Bay. The extension is
setback 4.155m and is 5.7m high. Under Clause D.3.4.2 of the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982, to be permitted, a wall greater than 9.0 metres in length
needs to be set back 3.0 metres or 55% the height of the wall, whichever is greater.
To be permitted, the wall therefore needs to be set back 3.1 metres from the side
boundary. It complies with this provision. In fact, it complies with the exempt provision
under Clause D.3.4.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, which requires a
setback of 2/3 the height of the wall, or 3.8 metres. By complying with the permitted
standards, the development has had regard to the need to minimise winter sunlight
loss to the neighbouring property.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 13 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
11 Quorn Street
The extension is 8.2 metres high and set back 5.8 metres from the side boundary
with 11 Quorn Street, Sandy Bay. Under Clause D.3.4.2 of the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982, to be permitted, a wall needs to be set back 3.0 metres or
55% the height of the wall, whichever is greater. To be permitted, the wall therefore
needs to be set back 4.5 metres from the side boundary. It complies with this
provision. In fact, it complies with the exempt provision under Clause D.3.4.2 of the
City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, which requires a setback of 2/3 the height of
the wall, or 5.4 metres. By complying with the permitted standards, the development
has had regard to the need to minimise winter sunlight loss to the neighbouring
property.
(c)
Minimise visual bulk in close proximity to existing buildings.

Both walls comply with the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 in
relation to their setback to the boundary (Clause D.3.4.2). By complying with the
permitted standards, the development has had regard to the need to minimise visual
bulk in close proximity to neighbouring buildings.
(d)
Minimise noise intrusion to neighbouring dwelling units

If a planning permit is granted, it is recommended that a condition be placed on the
planning permit, requiring that the dance studio comply with the acceptable solution
under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 for commercial use noise emissions
in residential zones.
(e)
Complement or enhance the character of the neighbourhood

The words complement and enhance are not defined in the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982. The Macquarie Concise Dictionary defines complement as
something that completes or makes perfect. The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
defines it as meaning completing or fulfilling.
These definitions were used by the Resource Management and Planning Appeal
Tribunal in their determination of Aviation Consolidated Holdings Pty Ltd G Ters
and Y Wang v. Hobart City Council [2010] TASRMPAT 41 (11 March 2010) in
relation to Clause PC1.5, City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
Whilst the immediate area is bordered by the University to the west, Hutchins School
to the south and sports grounds to the east, the area between Earl Street, Nelson
Road and Sandy Bay Road has a distinct residential neighbourhood feel. This
perception is enhanced by the fact that it is surrounded by these large institutions
and open playing fields; like it is a residential enclave in the midst of much larger
sites. It has a consistency of housing types (with some exceptions) and building form,
and gardens that tend to be mature and well tended, and this contributes to the
sense of neighbourhood. The area does not simply blend into the surrounding
residential streets; it is kept separate from the rest of Sandy Bay by the educational
institutions and sports fields that surround it.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 14 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Whilst the area is not located in a heritage area under the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982, it will be under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 (heritage
area Sandy Bay 9). Areas have been listed as heritage areas in the Hobart Interim
Planning Scheme 2015 because they have particular significance; because of the
collective heritage value of individual places as a group for their streetscape and
townscape values.
The area has therefore been identified as having a particular streetscape or
townscape value. This value exists today, irrespective of which planning scheme is in
force, and these streetscape and townscape values help to define the character of
the neighbourhood.
The area defined in Fig. 7 below has been identified as having highly intact
Federation and Inter-War building stock and subdivision patterns reflecting the
original land grants and examples of very fine Federation and Inter-War housing
located in key positions. The Councils Cultural Heritage Officer has identified 7 and
9 Quorn Street as being important examples of Inter-War housing and integral to the
streetscape.
These highly intact and fine buildings form the character of the neighbourhood.
The Councils cultural heritage officer notes that 7 and 9 Quorn Street are important;
they are considered to be two of the highly intact and fine buildings, and are
therefore an integral part of the fabric of the neighbourhood that contribute to its
character. The replacement development does not complement or enhance the
character of the neighbourhood in the same way that the existing buildings do. Whilst
the replacement development is similar in form in a general sense, in that it is two
storeys with gabled ends, it does not complement the neighbourhood in that it does
not complete or make it perfect. In fact, it has the opposite effect, in that it removes a
building (number 9) which has formed an integral part of the character of the
neighbourhood since 1934, and which is still considered to complement the character
of the neighbourhood, and replaces it with a modern structure which is much larger,
bulkier and which does not look like a dwelling.
Fig. 7. Subject site and heritage area Sandy Bay 9 under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015
Author: Liz Wilson

- 15 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
In a more general sense, the statement of desired future character for precinct 30B,
of which this area is a small part, says that the precinct should be characterised by
single family detached houses and that the environmental character of the Precinct
should be derived from the existing high quality of development and the mature
gardens of the many early residences. For the reasons stated above, the proposal is
not considered to be consistent with this statement. It is also not consistent with the
objective of the residential 2 zone which says that development should sustain and
enhance the character of an area. The character of the area is described above, and
the proposal is not considered to sustain or enhance it.
Whilst the zone objective and statement of desired future character cannot sustain a
refusal in their own right, and are broad strategic statements, they assist the Council
in determining whether the density discretion is met; that is, whether the proposal
complements or enhances the character of the neighbourhood.
In summary, Clause B.11.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states:
In the Residential 1 to 4 Zones, any development which exceeds the basic plot ratio
shall only be approved where Council is satisfied that the criteria in Schedule K
PC1.5 are met.
The proposal exceeds basic plot ratio by 288m2, and so is subject to the Councils
discretion under Clause B.11.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. It does not
satisfy the criteria in clause PC1.5 referenced in clause B.11.2 City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982. In particular it does not complement or enhance the character of the
neighbourhood as required by clause PC1.5(e) of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982.
It is considered that the proposal does not comply with clause PC1.5(e) of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and so the Council should exercise its discretion under
clause B.11.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 to refuse the planning
application.
iv.
Height
Clause C.2.1 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states that the permitted height
for non-residential developments in the zone is 4.8 metres from natural ground level to the
upper floor level. The required variation to this height is 300mm which occurs at a single
point at the northern corner of the stage two building. This is not enough of a breach to
warrant refusal of the proposal.
v.
Siting and Landscaping
The proposal complies with the exempt and permitted setback provisions prescribed under
clause D.3.4.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 16 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
vi.
20/7/2015
Traffic, Access and Parking
The parking provisions under Schedule E for a primary and secondary school are based
on the number of staff. As the number of staff is not proposed to change under the
proposal, there is no requirement to provide any additional onsite car parking spaces, and
no discretion to refuse the proposal under schedule E of the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982.
vii. Heritage
The Tasmanian Heritage Council has no interest in the proposal.
The Mount Carmel site is listed in schedule F of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
It is not located within a heritage area. There is one listed property in Quorn Street
(number 2), which is not adjacent to the subject site.
Clause F.4.4 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 states:
Any new development within or adjacent to a place listed on the Heritage Register
shall be in keeping with and shall not detract from those characteristics of the place
which contribute to its cultural significance.
The Councils cultural heritage officer has commented as follows:
The proposal is for demolition and new structures on a site that is listed on the
Heritage Register. The City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 requires new
development within or adjacent to a place listed on the Heritage Register as being in
keeping and not detracting from the characteristics of the place. In this instance the
character is the loss of two residential dwellings and creation of a single two storey
development in a streetscape of individual houses.
In relation to the objective of the residential 2 zone and statement of desired future
character for Precinct 30B and its impact on the heritage values of the place, the Councils
cultural heritage officer has commented as follows:
The comments of the representors are relatively self explanatory and express the
degree of concern [within] the local neighbourhood about the loss of these two
buildings, both of which were originally family homes, originally built in 1933 and
1934 for well known Hobart families. The degree of change is also highlighted as
being considerable with the change from two single homes to a single larger nonresidential looking building with the loss of the rhythm of a residential street and the
filling in of the gap that exists between homes in this area. The streetscape and the
types of older homes are seen as being important characteristics to those living in the
immediate neighbourhood.
9 Quorn Street has been owned by the school since about 1987. The proposal is in
response to the fact that the houses do not provide an efficient layout for school life
and activities. There is no doubt that this is the case, however these two properties
were only ever built as houses for a family with bedrooms, living spaces, domestic
scaled bathrooms and kitchens. Both were designed in the domestic style of the
1930s as a home within a streetscape of other like homes and it was never
envisaged they would be owned or used by a school for school purposes.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 17 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The demolition of 9 Quorn Street would be premature in light of it being located within
a proposed Heritage Precinct under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 which
aims to protect the residential character of the area, a factor also spelt out by
residents.
In summary, the proposed partial demolition and full demolition of 7 and 9 Quorn
[Street] respectively does not sustain and enhance the character and amenity of the
area of predominantly detached houses and is therefore contrary to the Objective of
the Residential 2 Zone.
It is also considered contrary to the Statement of Desired Future Character which
describes the precinct as being characterised by predominately single family
detached houses in which the further development of offices is discouraged.
It is considered that the proposal is contrary to the relevant provisions of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and should be refused.
As background to the above comment, the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer has
thoroughly investigated the history of the property:
9 Quorn Street
The house at 9 Quorn Street dates to 1934 and was built for Mr Albert J. Connor.
Albert Connor was the founder of the drapery business AJ Connor Pty Ltd which was
set up in November 1923, growing into one of Hobarts major department stores,
located on the corner of Harrington Street and Liverpool Street, Hobart. It supplied
clothing, school uniforms and all manner of drapery to Hobart shoppers for many
decades and was an institution in the retail world of Hobart.
A garage was added to the house by the Connors in 1948 and was the basis of the
garage on the site today. In 1952 the house was advertised for sale, appearing in the
Mercury.
During this period the house was renumbered from 11 to 9 Quorn Street. It was
described as a modern Sandy Bay home, a gentlemans residence with four
bedrooms, having a double garage and beautiful garden. It was bought in about 1987
by the Catholic Church for administrative functions and study facilities.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 18 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 8 Extract from The Mercury 6 February 1952 p.17
7 Quorn St
The property at 7 Quorn Street (currently known as Providence House) was
previously a house and known as Addlestone. It was built in 1933 for Mrs R
Robertson and was the work of architect G Stanley Crisp. In 1938 and then in 1940,
when the house was owned by Mr C H Grant additions and alterations were done
including a new garage and the addition of the front bay window, the conversion of
this space from a garage to a living room with the tall chimney on the right. The
architect for this work was Eric Round. Architecturally it is reminiscent of English
homes and its name comes, most likely, from the town Addlestone south west of
London. The influence on domestic architecture in Hobart during the 1930s and
1940s can be traced firmly to Britain that encompassed ideals of the Arts and Crafts
movement as well as Tudor and Old English styles.
Both 7 and 9 Quorn Street exhibit these influences and G Stanley Crisp, architect for
7 Quorn Street was described as a gentlemen architects. 7 Quorn Street is most
likely one his designs before his early death in 1933. His office was the training
ground of other notable Hobart architects including Eric Round who completed the
alterations to 7 Quorn Street in 1940. The following drawings show the house as
designed in 1933 and with alterations in 1940.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 19 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 9. 7 Quorn Street 4998 (AE417/1/1857) 1933 Tasmanian Archive and Heritage Office
Fig. 10. 7 Quorn Street 8005 (AE417/1/3218) 1940 Tasmanian Archive and Heritage Office
By 1956 7 Quorn Street was converted into the Mt Carmel Convent including a new
chapel and bedrooms for the nuns. Roderick Cooper was the architect who designed
most of the Catholic Churchs buildings during the 1950s and 1960s.
Clause F.6.1 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 grants Council discretion to
refuse or permit any proposed use or development within a listed place. The subject
buildings (7-9 Quorn Street) are part of the heritage listed site, 361-365 Sandy Bay Road,
Sandy Bay. The Councils Cultural Heritage Officer has advised that the proposal detracts
from the characteristics of the place that contribute to its cultural significance, and has
recommended refusal.
xi.
Signage
No signage is proposed as part of the application.
Conclusion
The proposal does not comply with clause PC1.5 and clause F.4.4 of the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982 in that it does not complement or enhance the character of the
neighbourhood and detracts from the characteristics of the subject site that contribute to its
cultural significance. Refusal of the proposal is therefore recommended.
Author: Liz Wilson

- 20 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Recommendation
That: A. Pursuant to Part 2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the
Council refuse the application for partial demolition, extensions and
alterations to educational establishment at 361-365 Sandy Bay Road (Also
Known as 7-9 Quorn Street), Sandy Bay for the following reasons:
The proposal does not comply with with clause PC1.5(e) of the City
of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, and as a result the proposal does
not complement or enhance the character of the neighbourhood.
.
(a)
The proposal is inconsistent with clause F.4.4 of the City of

Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and as result it the proposal
detracts from the characteristics of the listed place (361-365
Sandy Bay Road), which contribute to its cultural significance. .
(Liz Wilson)
(Ian Stanley)
MANAGER DEVELOPMENT APPRAISAL

Date of Report: 18 May 2015
Attachment B Documents and Drawings
Author: Liz Wilson

- 21 -
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Description
Application Form
Title
Planning consultants report
Letter of application (2 pages
of letter only & not the
attached consultants report as
this has been superseded
above)
Site plan
Ground floor demolition plan
First floor demolition plan
Ground floor plan
First floor plan
Elevations & sections
Author: Liz Wilson
361-365 Sandy Bay Road (Also Known as 79 Quorn Street), Sandy Bay
Drawing
CT 1/149926
Author: Neil Shephard &
Associates
Author: G Luttrell
Project No: LPA 1402

Drawing No: SK01
Revision No:
Drawn by: Luttrell Pyefinch
Date of Drawing: 2 April 2015
Drawing No: SK02
Revision No:
Drawing No: SK03
Revision No:
Drawing No: SK04
Revision No:
Drawing No: SK05
Revision No:
Drawing No: SK06a
Revision No: A

- 22 -
Date of Lodgement
to Council
2/4/15
2/4/15
13/4/15
2/4/15
2/4/15
2/4/15
2/4/15
2/4/15
2/4/15
22/4/15
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
CPC Agenda
Existing elevation
Author: Liz Wilson

Drawing No: SK07
Revision No:

- 23 -
20/7/2015
22/4/15
File Ref: 7692409 P/361-365/820
eet
Quorn Str
21340
49690
PROVIDENCE
HOUSE
AREA OF PROPOSED WORK
61730
GLA's
PERFORMING
ARTS
Metro Bus Stop
LIBRARY
AMENITIES
Nelson
44300
Road
PRIMARY
KINDERGARTEN
61070
76050
31660
10
20
30
40
50
CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Middle Years Centre
361 - 365 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Mount Carmel College
54090
ART
60
70
80
Metro Bus Stop
90
100
No Standing 7.30am - 9.00am
ad
NORTH
Site Plan

received on the 2 April 2015.
LPA1402.SK01
Scale 1:500 @ A1
2 April 2015
224 Murray St, HOBART

6231 5112
info@lparchitects.com.au
LUTTRELL PYEFINCH architects
P5 8.30am - 9.00am
Mon - Fri
20120
ADMINISTRATION
SCIENCE
PRIMARY
42970
Metro School Bus Only

2.30pm - 4.30pm
Metro School Bus Only

2.30pm - 4.30pm
2P 8.00am - 6.00pm
Mon - Fri
Authorised Residents Excepted
1490 6140

2.30pm - 3.45pm
School Days
2P 9.30am - 2.30pm
Mon - Fri
20730
Street
44270
20000
42510
1430
David
2P 8.00am - 6.00pm
Mon - Fri
Authorised Residents Excepted
Bus Zone
School Days
Only

2.30pm - 3.45pm
School Days
2P 9.30am - 2.30pm
Mon - Fri
Sandy Bay Ro
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
STREET
Existing Crossing
QUORN
Retain existing school entry
Retain existing
crossover
Existing Bus Parking
Retain existing fence
Protect existing tree
Retain existing garden beds
Existing Driveway and Car

Parking
Existing lawn
Remove fence and low planting internal

to property
Retain existing concrete hardstanding
Ex. Carpark
Protect and retain existing brickwork

fence
Existing lawn
Retain existing entry in

brick fence
Protect and maintain

existing garden beds
and planting to
frontage
Ex. Porch
Ex. Office
Ex. Stair
Ex.
Porch
Ex. Office
Existing
Boardroom
Ex. Foyer
Ex. WC
Ex.
Change
Ex. Uniform Store
demolish internal walls and re-support as required

partially demolish external walls for extensions for proposed
Middle Years Centre
Retain soft landscaping
7 QUORN STREET
'Providence House'
Ex. Maintenance
Store
fully demolish and clear site for Middle Years Centre
9 QUORN STREET
Remove existing path.

Reinstate pathway to existing
gate at completion of works
Protect and maintain existing planting

to side boundary.
Ex. Kitchen
Ex. Staff Study
Ex. Chapel
Ex. Maintenance
Store
Ex. Office
Ex. Store
Ex. Learning
Support
Ex. WC
Ex. WC
Ex. Staff Study
Ex. Store
Existing
Pavilion
Existing Sports
Court
80
90
Existing
Pavilion
Existing
Pavilion
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
100
NORTH
LPA1402.SK02
Scale 1:100 @ A1
2 April 2015
Ground Floor - Demolition Plan

6231 5112
Existing grassed area
Existing Playground
Equipment
Existing Playground
Existing concrete path
Existing Playground
Protect and maintain existing tree

DOCUMENT
Existing Playground
cut back paving to extent of

new work
Existing Shed
remove existing fruit trees as required
Ex. Deck
remove existing paving
Ex. Store
Ex. Office
Ex. Office
Ex. Learning
Support
Ex. Learning
Support

to side boundary.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
demolish internal walls and re-support as required

partially demolish external wall to form link to proposed
Middle Years Centre
Retain Quorn Street facade
7 QUORN STREET
'Providence House'
fully demolish and clear site for Middle Years Centre
9 QUORN STREET
Ex. Office
Ex. Office
Ex. Office
Ex. Stair
Ex. Passage
Ex. Office
retain existing chimney
Ex. Office
Ex. WC
Ex. Office
Ex. Store
Ex. Office
Ex. Office
form opening in external wall

for glazed link and bridge
Ex. Office
retain existing dormer window
Ex. WC
Retain existing stair
Ex. Stair
Ex. Office
Ex. Office
Ex. Bath
Ex. Office
Ex.
Store
cut back existing tiled roof for

first floor expansion
Ex. Balcony
remove existing escape stair
remove existing roof for first

floor extension
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
80
90
100
NORTH
LPA1402.SK03
Scale 1:100 @ A1
2 April 2015
First Floor - Demolition Plan

6231 5112

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Existing Crossing
STREET
QUORN
Retain existing crossover
Retain existing school

entry and pathway
Existing Bus Parking
Retain existing fence
Protect existing tree
Existing Driveway and Car

Parking
5100
Low 'sitting' wall with

trafficable lawn
Protect and maintain

existing garden beds
and planting to
frontage
Establish new garden bed with

planting pattern and plant types
consistent with existing residential
character
Existing lawn
12100
New planting to match residential planting

type of decidous species
Proposed 1200mm long x 600mm high

ground mounted sign:
'MOUNT CARMEL COLLEGE
Middle Years Centre'
Retain existing concrete hardstanding
Ex. Carpark
Protect and retain existing brickwork

fence
Repair existing lawn upon completion to

maintain residential character. Provide
mature trees consistent with the Quorn Street
residential planting pattern of deciduos types
Office/
Store
Ex. Porch
Porch
Bench
Seat
WC
Work
bench
Bench
Seat
Lockers
Bag
Store
Lift
Bench
Seat
Lockers
under
bench
centralised staff workroom with glazing to

adjacent areas (operable windows)
provide work bench
Staff
provide storage wall under existing stair for

resources
operable wall between each learning
space and breakout
high level glazing to maximise flexibility
glazing to north east wall
Learning Space (75m2)
Alternate
egress
Lockers
under
Lockers
provide storage wall for resources

operable wall between learning space
and breakout
Lockers
under work
bench
WC
Store
provide sliding glass door to Learning Areas

to secure use of Dance Studio after hours
Foyer
Access
WC
Clnr
direct external access to Quorn Street for secure

community and after hours use
mirror and adjustable wall mounted barre
external access to terrace and concourse
access to sanitary facilities for after hours use
highlight windows to west elevation
Dance Studio (125m2)
New pathway to existing front gate. Increase

width of garden bed to boundary and reinforce
existing residential planting pattern and plant
types
5800
4900
10735
Entry
Tutorial
Office 2
Entry
operable wall between each learning

space and breakout
Foyer
Office 1
Kitchenette/
Common Room
Lockers
under
bench
Services
WC
Server
Stools
Covered Terrace &

Outdoor Learning
Plant/ Store under
Terrace
Building line above shown dotted
4155
1840
Retain existing entry in

brick fence
13785
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
Existing Sports
Court
Existing Platform
Existing Path
Existing
Playground
70
80
90
100
NORTH
LPA1402.SK04
Scale 1:100 @ A1
2 April 2015
Ground Floor Plan

DOCUMENT

6231 5112

to side boundary.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
7600
Lockers
Lockers
under
Work
bench
Work
bench
Bench
Seat
work bench
Work bench
retain existing chimney
existing tiled roof
existing 'attic' window
Bench
Seat
existing stair
Lockers

provide work bench, shelving
Staff

and breakout
Lockers under
Bench
Seat
Lockers
under

provide work bench, shelving
Staff

operable wall between learning space and
breakout
high level of internal glazing to maximise
supervision and flexibility
highlight windows
Bench
Seat
Bench
Seat
Lockers
under
Lockers
Bench
Seat
Lift
Bench
Seat
WC
Tutorial
Outdoor
Learning

and breakout
Work bench
Lockers under
domestic cooking equipment

stools to one side
Kitchen/ Science
Lockers

breakout and between adjacent learning
space

breakout and between adjacent learning
space
highlight windows
roof line over
extend building to provide

shading and screening
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
80
90
100
NORTH
LPA1402.SK05
Scale 1:100 @ A1
2 April 2015
First Floor Plan

6231 5112

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
6785
8500
Longitudinal Section
North West Elevation (Side Boundary)
Plant floor level beyond shown

dashed
Etched coloured Blockwork
Lourved Screen
Brickwork
High level dormer window to

maintain privacy (no overlooking) powder coat finish
North East Elevation (Internal)
Building elements to be interpretation of 'domestic' scale:

utilise masonry and rendered panels to reduce scale
form plinth to building to reduce scale
window pattern and heights to be similar to existing
roof plane to be 'transferred ' to ground plane similar to
existing building elements including roof, gable and portico
South West Elevation (Quorn Street)
Brickwork
Render - paint finish
Brickwork
Existing tile roof
Breakout
Office
Learning Space
Dance Studio
Roof form continuous through internal space. Internal full

height walls to be glazed to underside ceiling to create
continuous folding ceiling visually 'connecting' all spaces
Brickwork
Aluminium framed windows powder coat finish
Render paint finish
Metal roof - colorbond finish
Render paint finish
Extend existing gable roof and

ridge line to extension
Brickwork
Render paint finish
Staff
Blockwork
Brickwork
Covered area shown dashed
Existing gable
Existing tile roof
Learning Space
Learning Space
Render paint finish
Remove existing gable
Existing tile roof
Render paint finish
existing face brickwork

utilise masonry and rendered panels with setbacks to
each plane to reduce scale
window sill height and screening to prevent over looking
Proposed 1200mm long x 600mm high ground mounted sign
Face brickwork
Remove existing gable. Return gable to south

west and match existing roof pitch
Quorn Street
Existing face brickwork fence to be

retained

dashed
Blockwork
Brickwork
Existing brickwork
Existing chimney
Face brickwork to former

doorway and louvre window
Replace existing windows to dormer

with performance glass
Extend existing dormer
Existing tile roof at abutment to

extension
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
80
Brickwork
90
100
Render paint finish
NORTH
LPA1402.SK06
Scale 1:100 @ A1
2 April 2015
Elevations and Sections
Blockwork

DOCUMENT

6231 5112
South East Elevation (Side Boundary)
8200
Match roof pitch of existing gable

end. Ridge height to match existing
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Longitudinal Section
11 QUORN STREET
North West Elevation (Side Boundary)

dashed
Etched coloured Blockwork
Lourved Screen
Brickwork
High level dormer window to

maintain privacy (no overlooking) powder coat finish
North East Elevation (Internal)

utilise masonry and rendered panels to reduce scale
roof plane to be 'transferred ' to ground plane similar to
existing building elements including roof, gable and portico
South West Elevation (Quorn Street)
11 QUORN STREET
Brickwork
8500
Existing tile roof
Brickwork
Existing face brickwork

boundary wall (2240mm
high minimum)
Existing 9 Quorn Street

building outline and
chimney shown dashed
Render paint finish
Render paint finish
Extend existing gable roof and

ridge line to extension

building outline and
chimney shown dashed
Blockwork
Brickwork
Covered area shown dashed
Existing gable
Existing tile roof
Brickwork
Dance Studio
Learning Space
Render paint finish
Office
Breakout
Staff

end gable shown
dashed

utilise masonry and rendered panels with setbacks to
each plane to reduce scale
window sill height and screening to prevent over looking
Roof form continuous through internal space. Internal full

height walls to be glazed to underside ceiling to create
continuous folding ceiling visually 'connecting' all spaces
Render paint finish
Remove existing gable
Former Garage building outline shown dashed
Brickwork
Render paint finish
Match roof pitch of existing gable

end. Ridge height to match existing
Learning Space
Quorn Street
Existing face brickwork fence to be

retained
Learning Space
Existing tile roof

dashed
Blockwork
Brickwork
Proposed 1200mm long x 600mm high ground mounted sign
Face brickwork
Remove existing gable. Return gable to south

west and match existing roof pitch
8200
Face brickwork to former

doorway and louvre window
Replace existing windows to dormer

with performance glass
Extend existing dormer
7145
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
80
Brickwork
90
100
Render paint finish
DOCUMENT
NORTH
LPA1402.SK06.a
Scale 1:100 @ A1
21 April 2015
Elevations and Sections
Blockwork

6231 5112
Existing brickwork
Existing tile roof at abutment to

extension
South East Elevation (Side Boundary)
existing face brickwork
Existing chimney
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
South West Elevation (Existing Quorn Street Elevation)
11 QUORN STREET
10
20
30
40
50

Middle Years Centre
60
70
80
90
100
NORTH
LPA1402.SK07
Scale 1:100 @ A1
22 April 2015
Existing Elevation
DOCUMENT

6231 5112
Existing brickwork
Existing chimney
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

UNDER THE
CITY OF HOBART PLANNING SCHEME 1982
Demolition, alteration and extensions at

361-365 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
(aka 7 and 9 Quorn Street)
Prepared by Neil Shephard & Associates

31 March 2015
CPC Agenda
Mount Carmel College, Sandy Bay

Planning Application, March 2015
20/7/2015
NEIL SHEPHARD & ASSOCIATES Planning and Development Consultants
CONTENTS
1.0
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................3
2.0
SCOPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...3
3.0
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT....4
4.0
DETAIL OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.7
5.0
CURRENT PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS..10
6.0
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES..14
7.0
PLANNING POLICIES15
8.0
STATE POLICIES..15
9.0
SOUTHERN TASMANIA REGIONAL LAND USE STRATEGY.16
10.0
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................16
DOCUMENT
This report is subject to copyright the owner of which is Neil Shephard & Associates Pty Ltd. All
unauthorized copying or reproduction of this report or any part of it is forbidden by law and is subject to
civil and criminal penalties as set out in the Copyright Act 1968. All requests for permission to
reproduce this report or its contents must be directed to Neil Shephard.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
1.0
INTRODUCTION
______________________________________________________________________________
1.1
This is an application seeking planning permission to undertake the upgrading and

refurbishment of existing facilities as well as extensions to accommodate new classroom
and teaching facilities for middle years students (years 7 and 8).
1.2
The proposal requires the demolition of a former dwelling at 9 Quorn Street that has
been used by the school for teaching and administrative purposes for many years, as
well as a chapel at 7 Quorn Street (known as Providence House), and replacement with
a new integrated structure annexed to the remaining balance of Providence House.
1.3
No increase in either student or staff numbers is proposed.
DOCUMENT
2.0
SCOPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
2.1
The Application for a planning permit is submitted in conjunction with this report. It
proposes the following:
Demolition of 9 Quorn Street ;
Demolition of the northern Chapel wing at 7 Quorn Street;
As Stage 1, a new 2 storey extension replacing the Chapel wing and converting
the entirety of 7 Quorn Street to learning spaces and accompanying staff
facilities for Year 7 and 8 students;
As Stage 2, a two (2) storey addition on 9 Quorn Street connecting to Stage 1,
integrating teaching areas on the upper floor, whilst providing a dance studio
and a kitchenette on the ground floor.
2.2
In summary the Application seeks to provide new and improved teaching facilities which
will integrate the building envelope over the two (2) sites without any significant
increase in building footprint or site coverage. The most obvious external change will be
that to the form of the building on 9 Quorn Street.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
3.0
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
3.1
The site of the proposed works is the western end of the Mount Carmel College campus
Authority:
that sits between Sandy Bay Road and Quorn Street. A sitePlanning
plan showing
theHobart
overallCity Council
campus site within the context of the local area is provided below in Figure 1. The entire
school campus is in a single title CT 149926/1 with an area of 1.551ha and frontage to
Sandy Bay Road, Quorn Street, and Nelson Road. A copy of the title documents is
Appendix A to this report.
Figure 1: Location of the Mount Carmel College campus at Sandy Bay.(base source: DPIW The
LIST 31/03/15)
3.2
The location of the proposed development relative to the overall school campus is
shown in the following aerial photo (Plate 1).
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Plate 1: Aerial photograph showing the location of the proposed development (pink) relative to
the overall school campus. (base source: DPIW TheLIST, State Orthophoto 31/03/15)
3.3
A more detailed plan showing the location of the development site relative to the
remainder of the school campus is provided in Figure 2 below.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Figure 2: Detail of the school campus showing the relative location of the proposed development
(hatched). (source: Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, Drawing No. LPA1402.SK01, 31/03/15)
3.4
9 Quorn Street is a former residence that has been owned by the school for several
decades. It is presently utilised for administration purposes including storage and supply
of school uniform items and parking for a school bus in a garage between the house and
the front boundary. The inter-war style building does not provide an efficient layout for
any aspect of school life on account of its small rooms, narrow corridors, small windows,
poor ventilation and ageing services.
3.5
The front garage is a relatively recent addition in a utilitarian rectangular style that is
unsympathetic to both the adjoining buildings and the streetscape on account of its
prominent projection forward of the building line.
3.6
7 Quorn Street, known as Providence House is a former residential accomodation for the
Sisters of Charity, who founded and administered Mount Carmel College on the site in
1947. Providence House is currently used as offices for teaching staff, a board room and
a chapel.
3.7
Providence House is underutilised on account of its small rooms, poor access to natural
light, and relative distance to the main areas of teaching and student activity elsewhere
on the campus.
3.8
As can be seen from both Figure 1 and Plate 1 above, the Mount Carmel campus sits
within a suburban residential area, although it fronts a busy arterial thoroughfare in the
form of Sandy Bay Road.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
3.9
At a slightly larger scale, the residential area is surrounded by institutional development

in the form of the University of Tasmania to the northwest, Hutchins School to the
southwest, Queenborough Recreation Ground to the south and southeast, the Wrest
Point commercial complex to the east, and the Derwent Sailing Squadron and Royal
Yacht Club of Tasmania clubhouses, slipyards and marinas to the north.
3.10
So whilst Mount Carmel Colleges immediate neighbours are residential, that character
and to some extent amenity is tempered by the presence of the school itself since 1947,
and the broader institutional, recreation and commercial developments that are also
well established.
3.11
The adjoining and nearby residences in Quorn Street are predominantly large two (2)
storey inter-war style (Federation and Arts and Crafts) set within large established
and mature gardens with generous front setbacks. Certain detailed features also
predominate including steep-pitched rooves with prominent gables, dark toned
masonry, and low, brick-piered front fences with a variety of picket, paling and breezebrick infill. Renovations to some properties over the years have varied the degree of
consistency of these details to some extent. Large exotic trees in front yards also
contribute significantly to the character of the streetscape.
3.12
Development to the southwest centred on David Street and Nelson Road provide much
greater extant consistency in terms of being predominantly single storey, dark red and
liver coloured brick, similar sized and located dwellings of more modest proportions and
detail. Generally these residences, set on similar sized rectangular lots with little
variation, have not undergone the same degree of redevelopment
or renovation
as
DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION
DOCUMENT
those in Quorn Street.
4.0
DETAIL OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
4.1
The proposed development will involve the following detailed works:

7 Quorn Street (Stage 1):
a) Demolition of the northern wing of Providence House comprising a chapel, offices
and staff study rooms.
b) Construction of a new two (2) storey extension to Providence House
approximately within the envelope of the demolition area.
c) Conversion of the existing board room kitchen and study to a formal learning
space (75m) with adjoining supportive utility, tutorial and office spaces. An
additional formal learning space (71m) is to be added to the rear of this original
part of the building and the adjoining outdoor terrace remodelled and expanded.
d) The new northern extension will be integrated to provide a seamless continuation
of the aforementioned spaces plus one additional 70m learning space.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
e) At the upper level the small dysfunctional existing offices (formerly
bedrooms for
the Sisters of Charity) will be converted to a centralised
staff workroom
withdocuments
an
This document
is one of the
to the
application
for a planning
adjoining 72m formal learning space and utilityrelevant
informal
spaces
with seating,
permit No. PLN-15-00398-01
lockers etc. Adjacent to that will be a new kitchen/domestic
science area, withand
a was
received
on
the
2
April
2015.
further formal learning space (74m), tutorial room and corridor connecting
through to the Stage 2 development at 9 Quorn Street.
f)
4.2
An outdoor learning area in the form of an enclosed gallery is provided on the

upper level of the northeastern elevation between the eastern most learning
space in the original portion of Providence House and the Stage 2 building at 9
Quorn Street.

a) Demolition of the existing former dwelling currently housing learning support/staff
offices, storage, uniform supply, and administration offices.
b) Demolition of garage/maintenance store
c) Removal of existing front partition fence and plantings on the boundary between 9
and 7 Quorn Street.
d) Construction of a new two (2) storey building to be integrated with Stage 1.
e) The new building will comprise a dance studio (125m) , office, storage, and
kitchenette on the ground floor with a terraced outdoor area provided as an
undercroft in the eastern and northeastern portion of the overall building
envelope. The existing garden bed and plantings will be augmented to reinforce
the residential planting pattern and assist maintaining neighbouring residential
amenity. A connecting foyer will provide the linkage to the Stage 1 development of
Providence House.
f)
4.3
On the upper floor three (3) formal learning spaces each approximately 70m will
enclose a central utility space to be used for lockers, informal seating. A small staff
workroom will be located above the ground floor foyer, with a glazing overlooking
the adjoining utility space. A corridor connects this part of the development to
Stage 1, adjacent to the staff workroom.
Building form and materials

The design of the new building components has been undertaken having regard to the
character of the existing and adjoining buildings and streetscape, particularly noting the
desire for a domestic scale whilst providing for the practical needs of the school.
4.4
As a consequence the development is no greater than two (2) storey and the current
height of Providence House.
4.5
The design utilises prominent gables and roof pitches, and retains a respectful 12m
setback to the street boundary (greater than currently).
4.6
The project architects Luttrell Pyefinch have provided the following description of the
details of the design intended to address the issues of domestic scale, the character of
the existing buildings, and the local character and streetscape:
CPC Agenda

4.7
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
document
is one
the documents
A combination of masonry and rendered panels This
are to
be utilised
toofreduce
relevant
to
the
application
for a planning
scale. On the northwestern elevation (side boundary) these shall include
setbacks to the panels to further reduce scale;
the building sits on a plinth, creating a further reduction in scale;
window pattern and heights are similar to existing;
window sill height on the northwestern elevation (side boundary) to be

highlight form to prevent overlooking. To be augmented where necessary with
screening/plantings;
the roof plane is to be transferred to the ground plane similar to the existing
building elements including roof, gable and portico;
retention of the face brickwork fence on the front boundary of 9 Quorn Street;
Inclusion of new planting to frontages;
Cutting back the existing gable end to Providence House to preserve a more
open outlook from David Street;
Providing additional specific building elements which reflect existing patterns,

such as:
glazing to gables with mullions reflecting those in Providence House;
dormer windows an extension of existing dormer;
gable ends detailed to be continuous to the ground plane similar to

Providence House bargeboard detail and roof;
entry porch between extension and existing similar in scale and detail to
existing porch;
glazing to gable ends to create a transparency for light/view;
new low roof between new and existing to reduce scale and preserve
outlook from David Street.
Hours of operation
No change is proposed to the regular established school operating envelope, ie 8.30 am
to 6pm (as required) Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm weekends.
4.8
However the school seeks Councils consideration for an allowance to use the proposed
dance studio for occasional extended weekday hours to 10pm. This would enable
flexibility to utilise that facility by a broader cohort of students and the community.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
5.0
CURRENT PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS
______________________________________________________________________________
5.1
Planning Scheme
The subject land is within the area of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 (the
planning scheme).
5.2
Zoning
The subject property is zoned Residential 2 under the planning scheme. This is shown in
Figure 3 below with the subject land coloured pale salmon.
Figure 3: representation of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 as provided on

TheLIST (31/03/15). In this version the pale salmon colour of the subject land Residential
2. The zonings correlate with the zone boundaries provided on the actual sealed
planning scheme map.
10
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
NEIL SHEPHARD & ASSOCIATESDEVELOPMENT

Planning and Development
Consultants
APPLICATION
DOCUMENT
5.3
The objective for the Residential 2 Zone is provided in clause 5.8 as being:
...to sustain and enhance the character and amenity of areas of

predominantly detached houses, with limited development of
complementary dwelling-types and minimum intrusion or further
development of non-residential uses not necessary to serve local
residents.
5.4
This objective does not prevent school use or development a fact reflected in the
Discretionary status of the relevant Use Group within both the Residential 2 Zone and
the respective Precinct (see further discussion below). There are a great many schools
existing within the Residential 2 Zone and they provide an important social and
economic function to both local residents, the greater metropolitan area and southern
Tasmania region. Mt Carmel College has provided this function since 1947 and
continues to do so.
5.5
The test required is minimum intrusion or (sic) further development of non-residential

uses not necessary to serve local residents. The use of the subject land and buildings is
long-established, and provides a local educational function.
5.6
In consideration of the minimum intrusion of further development, the construction of

the new development must be balanced against the demolition of the existing elements.
In this respect:
the footprint of the new development is, if taken overall not significantly greater
than the existing. It does consolidate the current fragmented structures on the
subject site into a single integrated form, which sits generally within the current
envelope;
efforts have been taken to ensure that the form and scale of the development is
mitigated to reflect the domestic scale and character of the surrounding
residences. In other words, large two (2) storey structures with prominent
rooves and gables. Set back from the street in established mature gardens.
Further design details have been incorporated to reduce the potential bulk and
scale of the new development with articulated roof forms and regressive
masonry panelling;
use of highlight windows, screening and additional plantings will practically
address impacts at the side boundary .
5.7
Although the proposal is new and therefore different to what is currently on site, it is
sympathetic to the form and scale of development in the immediate locality, addresses
potential impacts on adjoining amenity, and has the potential to restore a superior
streetscape outcome than currently exists through careful selective plantings.
5.8
Precinct
The subject land is within Precinct 30B The Lower Sandy Bay Precinct. The desired
future character for Precinct 30B is stated under clause 5.8.7 as:
11
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT

to the application for a planning
The Precinct should continue to be characterised relevant
by predominantly
single
family detached houses supported by a limited number
of on
medium
density
received
the 2 April
2015.
housing developments and a range of small local shops. Further

Authority: Hobart City Council
development of offices and non-local shops shouldPlanning
be discouraged.
The environmental character of the Precinct should be derived from the
existing high quality of development and the mature gardens of the many
early residences.
The beaches and waterfront between Sandy Bay Point and Wrest Point
should be accessible to the Public..
5.9
No change from one use group to another is proposed, rather a net increase in floor
area for the same use, and a change in the building form from two separate buildings to
one single integrated building. The development will not result in an increase staff or
student numbers, but rather is intended to be an improvement in the quality of facilities
provided to the teaching and administrative staff, and the middle years students.
5.10
In terms of consistency with the statement of the above desired future character for the
precinct the following applies:
the proposed development will not alter the predominance of single detached
houses within Precinct 30B;
The proposed development will not introduce further medium density housing
into the precinct;
The proposed development will not introduce offices or shops into the precinct
other than to provide for such functions as are currently integrated into,
ancillary, and specific to the school;
The proposed development seeks to retain and augment the quality of
development through sympathetic building form and attention to streetscape
impacts;
The proposed development will have no impact on access to the beaches and
waterfront.
5.11
In summary the proposal is considered to be consistent with the stated desired future
character for Precinct 30B.
5.12
Use Class Status

The school is classified as an Educational Establishment under clause A.1 of the planning
scheme which is categorized into Use Group VII and is Discretionary under Table A1 of
Schedule A of the planning scheme. However no change of Use is proposed as the
educational function will continue unchanged.
5.13
Development Status
Under Schedule B of the planning scheme a Basic Plot Ratio of 0.4 is prescribed for
Precinct 30B, but no Maximum Plot Ratio is provided. The current floor area is 5629m
12
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Thisproposed
documentdevelopment
is one of the documents
and the site area is 15,510m giving a plot ratio of 0.362. The
relevant
to
the
application
for a planning
will increase the overall floor area to 6492m which is a plot ratio of 0.419 (areas
provided by Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, op cit). Accordingly a variation is required,
which can be considered at Councils discretion pursuant to clause B.11.1 of the
planning scheme. This is considered separately below.
5.14
Under Schedule C of the planning scheme the permitted maximum height for Precinct
30B is 4.8m. The proposed maximum height as defined between natural ground level
and the upper most floor level is 5.1m at the northern corner of the Stage 2 building. A
variation to the permitted standard is therefore required and can be considered at
Councils discretion pursuant to clause C.2.1.
5.15
Under clause D.3.4.2 of Schedule D the permitted minimum setback to the

northwestern side boundary for the subject wall with a maximum 8m height is 55% or
4.33m. In the subject case the setback to the lower half of the wall is 5.8m, and that to
the upper part is 4.9m. Under the respective clause Council must ensure that the intents
of Parts 4 and 5 of the planning scheme are met.
5.16
No variation to car parking is required under Schedule E as there are no additional staff
members proposed.
5.17
The overall school campus is listed under Schedule F of the planning scheme as a
Heritage Place which consequently requires Council to exercise a discretion under
clause F.6.1. However the listing of the entire property relates to its origins as
Lauramont of which only the original residence survives in the northern third of the
property close to Sandy Bay Road. The Quorn Street buildings are approximately 60m
distant and separated by a variety of other school buildings and functions of different
architectural ages and styles. The proposed development is therefore not considered to
raise any practical concerns in respect of the fundamental heritage values of the
property.
5.18
The subject property is not within a Heritage Precinct.
13
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
6.0
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES REQUIRING ADDRESSING
6.1
Plot ratio
Given the significant public benefit that the school provides, it is assumed that
developments associated with the school automatically meet the test required under
Principle 8 of the planning scheme, ie:
Bonus plot ratio may be awarded in respect of development

which provides specific uses, facilities and features approved or
required for the benefit of the city in particular precincts.
6.2
Given that a variation (if required) is therefore provided for pursuant to clause B.4.1 of
the planning scheme, and there is no Maximum Plot Ratio prescribed for the Precinct,
the calculation of Plot Ratio is of no practical or statutory relevance. The more relevant
assessments are in respect of the impact of the proposed development on nearby
residential amenity, principally street character and car parking impacts.
6.3
Notwithstanding this the variation required to the Basic Plot Ratio is relatively minor,
being 0.019 or 104.7m, and cannot be realistically identified as producing a deleterious
outcome within the context of the overall site area and development on the school
campus. It is therefore considered that the minor variation to Basic Plot Ratio should be
allowed.
6.4
Height
The required variation to height is 300mm. It occurs at a single point at the northern
corner of the Stage 2 building.
6.5
Council is required to have regard to Principle 11 of the planning scheme before varying
the height standard. Principle 11 states:
Permitted height limits have been established for the various
Precincts, having regard to the nature of preferred development
for the Precinct in question. Within these limits the height of any
building or structure may be further controlled having regard to
the relevant Zone Objective, the desired future character of the
relevant Precinct, and considerations of streetscape, townscape
and amenity. A relaxation of these limits will only be considered
where the relevant Zone Objective and desired future character of
the Precinct are not compromised.
6.6
The consistency of the overall development is considered in detail in Section 5 of this

submission above, and it is concluded that on balance the proposed development
provides a sympathetic form and scale, having regard to the features and character of
the surrounding area. It is therefore considered that the minor variation to permitted
Height standard should be allowed.
14
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
6.7

Side setback
permit
PLN-15-00398-01
In considering the setback to the northwestern side boundary
as No.
a permitted
setback and was
received
on
the
2
April
rather than meeting the standard for an exempt setback Council must ensure that2015.
the
intents of Parts 4 and 5 of the planning scheme are met before
applying
conditions
to
the Permit.
6.8
The matters required to be addressed in respect of the Principles under Part 4 of the
scheme, and the Zone objectives and Precinct statements are considered to have been
addressed above in Section 5 of this report. It is therefore considered that Council can
be satisfied that no particular emit conditions are required.
6.9
Car parking
As indicated above, no additional students or staff are proposed. The element that
generates additional car parking for Primary and Secondary schools under Schedule E of
the scheme is additional staff. Consequently no further spaces are generated by this
proposal.
6.10
Heritage impact
Council is required to exercise a discretion under clause F.6.1 of the planning scheme.
However as indicated above, the proposed development is sited a considerable distance
from the fundamental reason for the subject property being listed the original
Lauramont residence. The development is also separated from Lauramont by several
other buildings of different styles, and the extent of the proposal does not encroach in
any significant way beyond the envelope of the existing buildings on that part of the
site. The proposed development is therefore not considered to raise any practical
concerns in respect of the fundamental heritage values of the property.
7.0
PLANNING POLICIES
______________________________________________________________________________
7.1
There are no specific strategic land use policies described in the planning scheme that
act against the proposed development. As stated above the key criteria for enabling the
proposal within the Residential 2 Zone and Precinct 30B are met.
8.0
STATE POLICIES
______________________________________________________________________________
8.1
There are no State Policies that are relevant to either the proposed developments.
15
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
NEIL SHEPHARD & ASSOCIATES

Planning and Development
Consultants
DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION
DOCUMENT
9.0
SOUTHERN TASMANIA REGIONAL LAND USE STRATEGY
______________________________________________________________________________
9.1
The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (STRLUS) identifies the need to
provide high quality social and community facilities to meet the
education, health and
care needs of the community. Schools, whether public or private are an essential
infrastructure element in this context.
9.2
Taking these matters into account the proposed development is considered to be

consistent with the following policy statements made in the STRLUS:
SI 1.2 Match location and delivery of social infrastructure with the
needs of the community and, where relevant, in sequence with
residential land release.
SI 1.3 Provide social infrastructure that is well located and
accessible in relation to residential development, public transport
services, employment and education opportunities.
SI 1.4 Identify and protect sites for social infrastructure,
particularly in high social dependency areas, targeted urban
growth areas (both infill and greenfield) and in identified Activity
Centres.
SI 1.5 Provide multi-purpose, flexible and adaptable social
infrastructure that can respond to changing and emerging
community needs over time.
10.0 CONCLUSION
______________________________________________________________________________
10.1
The proposed development is necessary to overcome the currently constraining

provision that prevents delivery of up-to-date educational services and student care for
middle years students and their teachers at the Mount Carmel College.
10.2
The proposed development is a constrained and carefully considered replacement of

existing outdated if not dysfunctional school buildings.
10.3
Minor variations to the standards for plot ratio and height are required, but do not
significantly impact on the surrounding area or adjoining owners.
10.4
It is considered that the new development will have limited impact on the amenity of
dwellings or the streetscape and character of the adjoining residential area.
10.5
In conclusion the proposed development IS considered to represent a sustainable

outcome.
Neil Shephard, BA, MTCP (SYD),MPIA, CPP
16
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
17
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
APPLICATION FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

UNDER THE
CITY OF HOBART PLANNING SCHEME 1982
Demolition, alteration and extensions at

361-365 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
(aka 7 and 9 Quorn Street)
Prepared by Neil Shephard & Associates

Rev 1- 31 March 2015
CPC Agenda

CONTENTS
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
1.0
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................3
2.0
SCOPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT...4
3.0
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT....5
4.0
DETAIL OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.11
5.0
CURRENT PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS..15
6.0
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES..19
7.0
PLANNING POLICIES22
8.0
STATE POLICIES..22
9.0
SOUTHERN TASMANIA REGIONAL LAND USE STRATEGY.22
10.0
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................23
REFERENCES24
This report is subject to copyright the owner of which is Neil Shephard & Associates Pty Ltd. All
unauthorized copying or reproduction of this report or any part of it is forbidden by law and is subject to
civil and criminal penalties as set out in the Copyright Act 1968. All requests for permission to
reproduce this report or its contents must be directed to Neil Shephard.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
1.0
INTRODUCTION
DOCUMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
1.1

This is an application seeking planning permission to undertake
upgrading andand was
permit No.the
PLN-15-00398-01
refurbishment of existing facilities as well as extensions to accommodate
new
classroom
received on the 13 April
2015.
and teaching facilities for middle years students (years 7 and 8).
1.2
The proposal requires the demolition of a former dwelling at 9 Quorn Street that has
been used by the school for teaching and administrative purposes for many years, as
well as a chapel at 7 Quorn Street (known as Providence House), and replacement with
a new integrated structure annexed to the remaining balance of Providence House.
1.3
No increase in either student or staff numbers is proposed.
Plate 1: 9 Quorn Street (known as the Whitehouse) proposed to be demolished
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Plate 2: 7 Quorn Street (known as Providence House). The 2 storey wing to the left of the large
central gable in the photo is proposed to be demolished and the area redeveloped with a new 2
storey building that extends across into the former building envelope of the Whitehouse at 9
Quorn Street.
DOCUMENT
2.0
SCOPE OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
2.1
The Application for a planning permit is submitted in conjunction with this report. It
proposes the following:
Demolition of 9 Quorn Street ;
Demolition of the northern Chapel wing at 7 Quorn Street;
As Stage 1, a new 2 storey extension replacing the Chapel wing and converting
the entirety of 7 Quorn Street to learning spaces and accompanying staff
facilities for Year 7 and 8 students;
As Stage 2, a two (2) storey addition on 9 Quorn Street connecting to Stage 1,
integrating teaching areas on the upper floor, whilst providing a dance studio
and a kitchenette on the ground floor.
2.2
In summary the Application seeks to provide new and improved teaching facilities which
will integrate the building envelope over the two (2) sites without any significant
increase in building footprint or site coverage. The most obvious external change will be
that to the form of the building on 9 Quorn Street.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
3.0
LOCATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
3.1
The site of the proposed works is the western end of the Mount Carmel College campus
that sits between Sandy Bay Road and Quorn Street. A site plan showing the overall
campus site within the context of the local area is provided below in Figure 1. The entire
school campus is in a single title CT 149926/1 with an area of 1.551ha and frontage to
Sandy Bay Road, Quorn Street, and Nelson Road. A copy of the title documents is
provided under separate cover.
Figure 1: Location of the Mount Carmel College campus at Sandy Bay.(base source: DPIW The
LIST 31/03/15)
3.2
The location of the proposed development relative to the overall school campus is
shown in the following aerial photo (Plate 3).
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Plate 3: Aerial photograph showing the location of the proposed development (pink) relative to
the overall school campus. (base source: DPIW TheLIST, State Orthophoto 31/03/15)
3.3
A more detailed plan showing the location of the development site relative to the
remainder of the school campus is provided in Figure 2 below.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Figure 2: Detail of the school campus showing the relative location of the proposed development
(hatched). (source: Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, Drawing No. LPA1402.SK01, 31/03/15)
3.4
9 Quorn Street is a former residence that has been owned by the school for several
decades. It is presently utilised for administration purposes including storage and supply
of school uniform items and parking for a school bus in front of a garage/workshop
between the house and the front boundary. The inter-war style building does not
provide an efficient layout for any aspect of school life on account of its small rooms,
narrow corridors, small windows, poor ventilation and ageing services.
3.5
The front garage/workshop is a more recent addition in a utilitarian rectangular style

that is unsympathetic to both the adjoining buildings and the streetscape on account of
its prominent projection forward of the building line.
3.6
7 Quorn Street, known as Providence House is a former residential accomodation for the
Sisters of Charity, who founded and administered Mount Carmel College on the site in
1947. Providence House is currently used as offices for teaching staff, a board room and
a chapel.
3.7
Providence House is underutilised on account of its small rooms, poor access to natural
light, and relative distance to the main areas of teaching and student activity elsewhere
on the campus.
3.8
As can be seen from both Figure 1 and Plate 3 above, the Mount Carmel campus sits
DEVELOPMENT
within a suburban residential area, although
it fronts a busyAPPLICATION
arterial thoroughfare in the
DOCUMENT
form of Sandy Bay Road.
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
3.9
At a slightly larger scale, the residential area is surrounded by institutional development

in the form of the University of Tasmania to the northwest, Hutchins School to the
southwest, Queenborough Recreation Ground to the south and southeast, the Wrest
Point commercial complex to the east, and the Derwent Sailing Squadron and Royal
Yacht Club of Tasmania clubhouses, slipyards and marinas to the north.
3.10
So whilst Mount Carmel Colleges immediate neighbours are residential, that character
and to some extent amenity is tempered by the presence of the school itself since 1947,
and the broader institutional, recreation and commercial developments that are also
well established.
3.11
The adjoining and nearby residences in Quorn Street are predominantly large two (2)
storey inter-war style (Federation and Arts and Crafts) set within large established
and mature gardens with generous front setbacks. Certain detailed features also
predominate including steep-pitched rooves with prominent gables, dark toned
masonry, and low, brick-piered front fences with a variety of picket, paling and breezebrick infill. Renovations to some properties over the years have varied the degree of
consistency of these details to some extent. Large exotic trees in front yards also
contribute significantly to the character of the streetscape.
Plate 4: examples of 2 storey residences adjoining 9 Quorn Street.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Plate 5: examples of 2 storey residences opposite 9 Quorn Street.
Plate 6: streetscape opposite Providence House.

3.12
DOCUMENT
Planning
Authority:
Council
Development to the southwest centred on David
Street and
NelsonHobart
Road City
provides
much
greater extant consistency in terms of being predominantly single storey, dark red and
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
liver coloured brick, similar sized and located dwellings of more modest proportions and
detail. Generally these residences, set on similar sized rectangular lots with little
variation, have not undergone the same degree of redevelopment or renovation as
those in Quorn Street.
Plate 7: examples of single storey residences in Nelson Road.

DOCUMENT
10
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
4.0
DETAIL OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
4.1
The proposed development will involve the following detailed works:

a) Demolition of the northern wing of Providence House comprising a chapel, offices

and staff study rooms.
b) Construction of a new two (2) storey extension to Providence House
approximately within the envelope of the demolition area.
c) Conversion of the existing board room kitchen and study to a formal learning
space (75m) with adjoining supportive utility, tutorial and office spaces. An
additional formal learning space (71m) is to be added to the rear of this original
part of the building and the adjoining outdoor terrace remodelled and expanded.
d) The new northern extension will be integrated to provide a seamless continuation
of the aforementioned spaces plus one additional 70m learning space.
e) At the upper level the small dysfunctional existing offices (formerly bedrooms for
the Sisters of Charity) will be converted to a centralised staff workroom with an
adjoining 72m formal learning space and utility informal spaces with seating,
lockers etc. Adjacent to that will be a new kitchen/domestic science area, with a
further formal learning space (74m), tutorial room and corridor connecting
through to the Stage 2 development at 9 Quorn Street.
11
CPC Agenda

f)
20/7/2015
An outdoor learning area in the form of an enclosed gallery is provided on the

upper level of the northeastern elevation between the eastern most learning
space in the original portion of Providence House and the Stage 2 building at 9
Quorn Street.
DOCUMENT
Plate 10: The 2 storey Chapel wing of Providence House shown here with the ridge line
perpendicular to the original west-facing gables is to be demolished and replaced with a new
building connecting to the Stage 2 redevelopment of the Whitehouse at 9 Quorn Street.
Figure 3: the proposed redevelopment of the Chapel wing to provide additional learning spaces
and staff offices/facilities and a foyer integrating with redevelopment of the Whitehouse site
at 9 Quorn Street on the left edge of this drawing (source: Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, Drawing
No. LPA1402.SK06, 31/03/15).
12
CPC Agenda

4.2
20/7/2015
NEIL SHEPHARD & ASSOCIATES Planning
and Development Consultants
DOCUMENT
a) Demolition of the existing former dwelling currently housing

learning
support/staff
Planning
Authority:
Hobart City Council
offices, storage, uniform supply, and administration offices.
b) Demolition of garage/maintenance store
c) Removal of existing front partition fence and plantings on the boundary between 9
and 7 Quorn Street.
d) Construction of a new two (2) storey building to be integrated with Stage 1.
e) The new building will comprise a dance studio (125m), office, storage, and
kitchenette on the ground floor with a terraced outdoor area provided as an
undercroft in the eastern and northeastern portion of the overall building
envelope. The existing garden bed and plantings will be augmented to reinforce
the residential planting pattern and assist maintaining neighbouring residential
amenity. A connecting foyer will provide the linkage to the Stage 1 development of
Providence House.
f)
On the upper floor three (3) formal learning spaces each approximately 70m will
enclose a central utility space to be used for lockers, informal seating. A small staff
workroom will be located above the ground floor foyer, with a glazing overlooking
the adjoining utility space. A corridor connects this part of the development to
Stage 1, adjacent to the staff workroom.
Figure 4: the proposed redevelopment of the Whitehouse to provide a dance studio, additional
learning spaces and staff offices. This building will connect to the Stage 1 redevelopment of the
Chapel wing on the right edge of the drawing (source: Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, Drawing No.
LPA1402.SK06, 31/03/15).
4.3
Building form and materials

The design of the new building components has been undertaken having regard to the
character of the existing and adjoining buildings and streetscape, particularly noting the
desire for a domestic scale whilst providing for the practical needs of the school.
4.4
As a consequence the development is no greater than two (2) storey and the current
height of Providence House.
13
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
4.5
The design utilises prominent gables and roof pitches, and retains a respectful 12m
setback to the street boundary (greater than currently).
4.6
The project architects Luttrell Pyefinch have provided the following description of the
details of the design intended to address the issues of domestic scale, the character of
the existing buildings, and the local character and streetscape:
4.7
A combination of masonry and rendered panels are to be utilised to reduce

scale. On the northwestern elevation (side boundary) these shall include
setbacks to the panels to further reduce scale;
the building sits on a plinth, creating a further reduction in scale;
window pattern and heights are similar to existing;
window sill height on the northwestern elevation (side boundary) to be

highlight form to prevent overlooking. To be augmented where necessary with
screening/plantings;
the roof plane is to be transferred to the ground plane similar to the existing
building elements including roof, gable and portico;
retention of the face brickwork fence on the front boundary of 9 Quorn Street;
Inclusion of new planting to frontages;
Cutting back the existing gable end to Providence House to preserve a more
open outlook from David Street;
Providing additional specific building elements which reflect existing patterns,

such as:
-
glazing to gables with mullions reflecting those in Providence House;
dormer windows an extension of existing dormer;
gable ends detailed to be continuous to the ground plane similar to

Providence House bargeboard detail and roof;
entry porch between extension and existing similar in scale and detail to
existing porch;
glazing to gable ends to create a transparency for light/view;
new low roof between new and existing to reduce scale and preserve
outlook from David Street.
Hours of operation
No change is proposed to the regular established school operating envelope, ie 8.30 am
to 6pm (as required) Monday to Friday and 9am to 6pm weekends.
4.8
However the school seeks Councils consideration for an allowance to use the proposed
dance studio for occasional extended weekday hours to 10pm. This would enable
flexibility to utilise that facility by a broader cohort of students and the community.
DOCUMENT
14
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
5.0
CURRENT PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS
______________________________________________________________________________
5.1
Planning Scheme
The subject land is within the area of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 (the
planning scheme).
5.2
Zoning
The subject property is zoned Residential 2 under the planning scheme. This is shown in
Figure 3 below with the subject land coloured pale salmon.
Figure 3: representation of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 as provided on

TheLIST (31/03/15). In this version the pale salmon colour of the subject land Residential
2. The zonings correlate with the zone boundaries provided on the actual sealed
planning scheme map.
15
CPC Agenda

5.3
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
permit5.8
No.asPLN-15-00398-01
and was
The objective for the Residential 2 Zone is provided in clause
being:
...to sustain and enhance the character

and amenity of areas of
predominantly detached houses, with limited development of
complementary dwelling-types and minimum intrusion or further
development of non-residential uses not necessary to serve local
residents.
5.4
This objective does not prevent school use or development a fact reflected in the
Discretionary status of the relevant Use Group within both the Residential 2 Zone and
the respective Precinct (see further discussion below). There are a great many schools
existing within the Residential 2 Zone and they provide an important social and
economic function to both local residents, the greater metropolitan area and southern
Tasmania region. Mt Carmel College has provided this function since 1947 and
continues to do so.
5.5
The test required is minimum intrusion or (sic) further development of non-residential

uses not necessary to serve local residents. The use of the subject land and buildings is
long-established, and provides a local educational function.
5.6
In consideration of the minimum intrusion of further development, the construction of

the new development must be balanced against the demolition of the existing elements.
In this respect:
the footprint of the new development is, if taken overall not significantly greater
than the existing. It does consolidate the current fragmented structures on the
subject site into a single integrated form, which sits generally within the current
envelope;
efforts have been taken to ensure that the form and scale of the development is
mitigated to reflect the domestic scale and character of the surrounding
residences. In other words: large two (2) storey structures with prominent
rooves and gables; set back from the street in established mature gardens.
Further design details have been incorporated to reduce the potential bulk and
scale of the new development with articulated roof forms and recessive
masonry panelling;
use of highlight windows, screening and additional plantings will practically
address impacts at the side boundary .
5.7
Although the proposal is new and therefore different to what is currently on site, it is
sympathetic to the form and scale of development in the immediate locality, addresses
potential impacts on adjoining amenity, and has the potential to restore a superior
streetscape outcome than currently exists through careful selective plantings.
5.8
Precinct
The subject land is within Precinct 30B The Lower Sandy Bay Precinct. The desired
future character for Precinct 30B is stated under clause 5.8.7 as:
16
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT The Precinct should continue to be characterised by predominantly single
family detached houses supported by a limited number of medium density
relevant to the application for housing
a planningdevelopments and a range of small local shops. Further
permit No. PLN-15-00398-01 development
and was
of offices and non-local shops should be discouraged.
The environmental character of the Precinct should be derived from the

existing high quality of development and the mature gardens of the many
early residences.
The beaches and waterfront between Sandy Bay Point and Wrest Point
should be accessible to the Public..
5.9
No change from one use group to another is proposed, rather a net increase in floor
area for the same use, and a change in the building form from two separate buildings to
one single integrated building. The development will not result in an increase in staff or
student numbers, but rather is intended to be an improvement in the quality of facilities
provided to the teaching and administrative staff, and the middle years students.
5.10
In terms of consistency with the statement of the above desired future character for the
precinct the following applies:
the proposed development will not alter the predominance of single detached
houses within Precinct 30B;
The proposed development will not introduce further medium density housing
into the precinct;
The proposed development will not introduce offices or shops into the precinct
other than to provide for such functions as are currently integrated into,
ancillary, and specific to the school;
The proposed development seeks to retain and augment the quality of
development through sympathetic building form and attention to streetscape
impacts;
The proposed development will have no impact on access to the beaches and
waterfront.
5.11
In summary the proposal is considered to be consistent with the stated desired future
character for Precinct 30B.
5.12
Use Class Status

The school is classified as an Educational Establishment under clause A.1 of the planning
scheme which is categorized into Use Group VII and is Discretionary under Table A1 of
Schedule A of the planning scheme. However no change of Use is proposed as the
educational function will continue unchanged.
5.13
Development Status
Under Schedule B of the planning scheme a Basic Plot Ratio of 0.4 is prescribed for
Precinct 30B, but no Maximum Plot Ratio is provided. The current floor area is 5629m
17
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
and the site area is 15,510m giving a plot ratio of 0.362. The proposed development
will increase the overall floor area to 6492m which is a plot ratio of 0.419 (areas
provided by Luttrell Pyefinch Architects, op cit). Accordingly a variation is required,
which can be considered at Councils discretion pursuant to clause B.11.1 of the
planning scheme. This is considered separately below.
5.14
Under Schedule C of the planning scheme the permitted maximum height for Precinct
30B is 4.8m. The proposed maximum height as defined between natural ground level
and the upper most floor level is 5.1m at the northern corner of the Stage 2 building. A
variation to the permitted standard is therefore required and can be considered at
Councils discretion pursuant to clause C.2.1.
5.15
Under clause D.3.4.2 of Schedule D the permitted minimum setback to the

northwestern side boundary for the subject wall with a maximum 8m height is 55% or
4.33m. In the subject case the setback to the lower half of the wall is 5.8m, and that to
the upper part is 4.9m. Under the respective clause Council must ensure that the intents
of Parts 4 and 5 of the planning scheme are met.
5.16
No variation to car parking is required under Schedule E as there are no additional staff
members proposed.
5.17
The overall school campus is listed under Schedule F of the planning scheme as a
Heritage Place which consequently requires Council to exercise a discretion under
clause F.6.1. However the listing of the entire property relates to its origins as
Lauramont of which only the original residence survives in the northeastern third of
the property close to Sandy Bay Road. The Quorn Street buildings are approximately
60m distant and separated by a variety of other school buildings and functions of
different architectural ages and styles. The proposed development is therefore not
considered to raise any practical concerns in respect of the fundamental heritage values
of the property.
5.18
The subject property is not within a Heritage Precinct.
DOCUMENT
18
CPC Agenda

6.0
CONSIDERATION OF ISSUES
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
6.1
Plot ratio
Given the significant public benefit that the school provides, it is assumed that
developments associated with the school automatically meet the test required under
Principle 8 of the planning scheme, ie:
Bonus plot ratio may be awarded in respect of development
which provides specific uses, facilities and features approved or
required for the benefit of the city in particular precincts.
6.2
Given that a variation (if required) is therefore provided for pursuant to clause B.4.1 of
the planning scheme, and there is no Maximum Plot Ratio prescribed for the Precinct,
the calculation of Plot Ratio is of no practical or statutory relevance. The more relevant
assessments are in respect of the impact of the proposed development on nearby
residential amenity, principally street character and car parking impacts.
6.3
Notwithstanding this the variation required to the Basic Plot Ratio is relatively minor,
being 0.019 or 104.7m, and cannot be realistically identified as producing a deleterious
outcome within the context of the overall site area and development on the school
campus. It is therefore considered that the minor variation to Basic Plot Ratio should be
allowed.
6.4
Height
The required variation to height is 300mm. It occurs at a single point at the northern
corner of the Stage 2 building.
6.5
Council is required to have regard to Principle 11 of the planning scheme before varying
the height standard. Principle 11 states:
Permitted height limits have been established for the various
Precincts, having regard to the nature of preferred development
for the Precinct in question. Within these limits the height of any
building or structure may be further controlled having regard to
the relevant Zone Objective, the desired future character of the
relevant Precinct, and considerations of streetscape, townscape
and amenity. A relaxation of these limits will only be considered
where the relevant Zone Objective and desired future character of
the Precinct are not compromised.
6.6
The consistency of the overall development is considered in detail in Section 5 of this

submission above, and it is concluded that on balance the proposed development
provides a sympathetic form and scale, having regard to the features and character of
the surrounding area. It is therefore considered that the minor variation to permitted
Height standard should be allowed.
19
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
6.7
Side setback
In considering the setback to the northwestern side boundary as a permitted setback
rather than meeting the standard for an exempt setback Council must ensure that the
intents of Parts 4 and 5 of the planning scheme are met before applying conditions to
the Permit.
6.8
The matters required to be addressed in respect of the Principles under Part 4 of the
scheme, and the Zone objectives and Precinct statements under Part 5 are considered
to have been addressed above in Section 5 of this report. It is therefore considered that
Council can be satisfied that no particular permit conditions are required. In addition to
the increased setback of the proposed building compared to the current situation, as
well as use of highlight windows to prevent overlooking, existing landscaping and
screening can be augmented to retain if not improve the residential amenity (see Plates
11 and 12 below)
Plate 11
Plate 12
Existing side boundary setback between 9 and 11 Quorn Street showing current landscaping
from the street and the rear respectively.
6.9
Car parking
As indicated above, no additional students or staff are proposed. The element that
generates additional car parking for Primary and Secondary schools under Schedule E of
the scheme is additional staff. Consequently no further spaces are generated by this
proposal.
6.10
Heritage impact
Council is required to exercise a discretion under clause F.6.1 of the planning scheme.
However as indicated above, the proposed development is sited a considerable distance
from the fundamental reason for the subject property being listed the original
Lauramont residence. The development is also separated from Lauramont by several
other buildings of different styles, and the extent of the proposal does not encroach in
any significant way beyond the envelope of the existing buildings on that part of the
site. The proposed development is therefore not considered to raise any practical
in respect of the fundamental heritage values of the property.
DEVELOPMENT concerns
APPLICATION
DOCUMENT
20
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
Plate 13: Lauramont the original residence and the reason for the heritage listing is not
visible in the round but can only be appreciated from the Sandy Bay Road end of the school
campus, primarily from the front car park/forecourt and entrance driveway.
DOCUMENT
Plate 14: From the proposed development site only the distant glimpse of a chimney is any
indication of the original remaining portion of Lauramont. The intervening buildings, playground
and modern additions to the rear of Lauramont already prevent any direct view or appreciation
from the Quorn street end of the school campus.
21
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
7.0
PLANNING POLICIES
______________________________________________________________________________
7.1
There are no specific strategic land use policies described

in the
planning
scheme
Planning
Authority:
Hobart
City that
Council
act against the proposed development. As stated above the key criteria for enabling the
proposal within the Residential 2 Zone and Precinct 30B are met.
8.0
STATE POLICIES
______________________________________________________________________________
8.1
There are no State Policies that are relevant to the proposed developments.
9.0
SOUTHERN TASMANIA REGIONAL LAND USE STRATEGY
______________________________________________________________________________
9.1
The Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (STRLUS) identifies the need to
provide high quality social and community facilities to meet the education, health and
care needs of the community. Schools, whether public or private are an essential
infrastructure element in this context.
9.2
Taking these matters into account the proposed development is considered to be

consistent with the following policy statements made in the STRLUS:
SI 1.2 Match location and delivery of social infrastructure with the
needs of the community and, where relevant, in sequence with
residential land release.
SI 1.3 Provide social infrastructure that is well located and
accessible in relation to residential development, public transport
services, employment and education opportunities.
SI 1.4 Identify and protect sites for social infrastructure,
particularly in high social dependency areas, targeted urban
growth areas (both infill and greenfield) and in identified Activity
Centres.
SI 1.5 Provide multi-purpose, flexible and adaptable social
infrastructure that can respond to changing and emerging
community needs over time.
22
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
10.0 CONCLUSION
______________________________________________________________________________
10.1
The proposed development is necessary to overcome the currently constraining

provision that prevents delivery of up-to-date educational services and student care for
middle years students and their teachers at the Mount Carmel College.
10.2
The proposed development is a constrained and carefully considered replacement of

existing outdated if not dysfunctional school buildings.
10.3
Minor variations to the standards for plot ratio and height are required, but do not
significantly impact on the surrounding area or adjoining owners.
10.4
It is considered that the new development will have limited impact on the amenity of
dwellings or the streetscape and character of the adjoining residential area.
10.5
In conclusion the proposed development is considered to represent a sustainable

outcome.
Neil Shephard, BA, MTCP (SYD),MPIA, CPP
DOCUMENT
23
CPC Agenda

REFERENCES
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Certificate of Title Volume 149926 Folio 1

City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982
DPIW TheLIST 31/03/15
DPIW TheLIST, State Orthophoto 31/03/15
LUTTRELL PYEFINCH ARCHITECTS, Drawings No. LPA1402.SK01 to SK06, 31/03/15
Personal communications with Susan Ryan, Principal Mount Carmel College, and Kerrie
Lovelock, Business Manager Mount Carmel College
Southern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy 2010-2035 (Amended 1 October 2013)
www.mountcarmel.tas.edu.au
24

20/7/2015
6.

6.1

SCHEME 1982
6.1.3
30 RED CHAPEL AVENUE, SANDY BAY PARTIAL

DEMOLITION, HOUSE EXTENSION, ALTERATIONS,
ANCILLARY DWELLING, GARAGE, CARPORT AND
STORAGE (READVERTISED - AMENDED PROPOSAL)
PLN-15-00123-01 FILE REF: 5636294 & P/30/784
33xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
14 August 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00123-01
Address:
30 Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay
Applicant:
Luke and Prue Taylor, 30 Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay
Proposal:
Partial Demolition, House Extension, Alterations, Ancillary

Dwelling, Garage, Carport and Storage (Re-advertised Amended Proposal)
Representations:
Four (4)
Discretion:
Building Envelope, Garage and Carport Opening Width, Privacy
Executive Summary
The application proposes internal alterations to the existing house and a first floor rear
extension to accommodate a dining room and deck. The application also proposes the
demolition of the existing carport and its replacement with an enclosed garage with
attached carport and associated undercroft storage. The application proposes a granny
flat to be attached to the rear of the garage and carport.
The large site is on the eastern side of Red Chapel Avenue, close to its intersection with
both Chesham Court (to the north) and Longview Avenue (to the south). The site is in an
established residential area and is surrounded on all sides by residential properties.
The proposal invokes discretion under Planning Directive 4 with respect to privacy
(proximity of the deck proposed for the existing dwelling to the northern boundary),
building envelope (the southern elevation of the garage and ancillary dwelling) and garage
and carport opening width (the combined width of the openings of the garage and carport).
The proposal attracted four objections. All objections related only to the garage, carport
and ancillary dwelling. The concerns focussed on the impact on the amenity to the
northern and southern neighbours in terms of privacy, light and visual intrusion, as well as
the impact on the streetscape and character of the area.
The proposal is recommended for approval.
Author: Ben Ikin
30 Red Chapel Avenue
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site and location

The 1095m2 site is on the north eastern side of Red Chapel Avenue in an established
residential area and surrounded on all sides by residential properties. The site slopes
down at a gradient of approximately 20% towards the River Derwent in a north easterly
direction.
Fig 1. Locational image with the site highlighted in red. Sandy Bay Road is the main road at the top right of
the image, Churchill Avenue is the main road on the bottom left of the image.
Fig. 2: A site image with the site bordered in blue.
Author: Ben Ikin

-2-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 3: The existing street front of the site.
Zoning and Precinct

The site is within the Residential 2 Zone and Precinct 30B The Lower Sandy Bay
Precinct.
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
The application proposes internal alterations to the existing house and a first floor rear
extension to accommodate a dining room and deck. The application also proposes the
demolition of the existing carport and its replacement with an enclosed garage with
attached carport and associated undercroft storage. The application proposes a granny
flat to be attached to the rear of the garage and carport.
Fig. 4 The proposed upper level floor plan

with rear extension and deck.
Author: Ben Ikin
Fig. 5: The proposed garage, carport and

granny flat.

-3-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Background
The proposal was originally advertised between 04 and 19 March 2015. Two (2) objections
were received.
In response to the concerns raised in the objections and by the Councils Development
Appraisal Officer the proposal was amended. The amended design resulted in a smaller
garage and an increased setback of the ancillary dwelling from the southern boundary.
The amended proposal was readvertised between 05 and 22 June 2015. Four (4)
objections were received during the readvertising period. Refer below to Representations
for details of the concerns raised by the objections.
Discretion
The discretions invoked under Planning Directive 4 are set out in the table below.
Discretion
Proposed
Building envelope
Development is required to be
contained with a prescribed
building envelope.
Portions of the south

elevation of the garage
and ancillary dwelling
are outside the
prescribed building
envelope.
Garage and Carport

Opening Width
The total width of the openings of

garages and carports on a
primary frontage must not exceed
6m.
The proposal includes a

double garage and a
carport. The garage has
an opening of 5m and
the carport has an
opening of 4 metre,
giving a combined total
opening of 9m.
Privacy
Decks with a floor level of more

than 1m above natural ground
level must have a setback from a
side boundary of 3 metres.
The extension to the

existing dwelling
includes a deck which is
setback 2.7 metres from
the northern boundary.
Representations
Four (4) objections were received during the readvertising period of 05 June to 22 June
2015. The table below details the concerns raised and provides a planning response to
them. An assessment of the discretions invoked is provided below under Appraisal.
Concerns Raised
Planning Response
The proposal is out of character with the

desired future character of the Lower Sandy
Bay Precinct.
This is not supported. The proposal is

for works associated with a single
dwelling. Refer below to Appraisal.
Author: Ben Ikin

-4-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Allowing a granny flat in the front garden sets

a new precedent whereby the majority of
residents could establish an income earner in
the front garden to the detriment of the
amenity of the surrounding area.
It is generally accepted that there is no

precedent in planning with each new
application dealt with on its merits.
There is also no indication that the
ancillary dwelling is a money earner.
The ancillary dwelling is proposed as an
accessory to the existing single
dwelling. As an ancillary dwelling it
cannot be stratum titled and sold off to a
separate owner. Any change of use of
the ancillary dwelling (i.e. to visitor
accommodation) would require separate
planning approval. A condition to this
effect has been included.
The proposed garage and carport will require

an undesirable modification to the footpath.
The proposed elevations show the

garage and carport at footpath level.
The ancillary dwelling and garage has a

significant impact on the streetscape and is
completely out of character with the existing
dwellings in the street.
The proposal complies with the setback

requirements of Planning Directive 4.
Refer below to Appraisal.
The ancillary dwelling is well outside the

prescribed building envelope on its southern
side.
The ancillary dwelling is outside the

prescribed building envelope on its
southern elevation. Refer below to
Appraisal and in particular Figure 6,
which illustrates the extent to which the
proposal is outside the prescribed
envelope.
The ancillary dwelling will be visually bulky

and intrusive for the southern neighbour and
will over shadow their private open space in
the front garden.
The proposed ancillary dwelling will alter

the view from the southern neighbours
garden and from their front (street side)
rooms. However the impact is not
considered to be unreasonable based
on the extent to which the ancillary
dwelling is outside the building
envelope, the north easterly facing
aspect of the site and dwelling and the
large size of the neighbours site. The
proposal will only impact on a very small
portion of this neighbours property.
The ancillary dwelling has windows within 3m

of the southern boundary.
Windows in the ancillary dwelling which

face the southern boundary and
neighbour are frosted (obscured). This
is compliant with the applicable
acceptable solution. Refer below to
Appraisal.
Author: Ben Ikin

-5-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The garage and carport extend across 60% of The sites frontage is 15.2 metres; the
the frontage, with the total width of the carport garage and carport extend across the
frontage for 10.3 metres. The extent of
and garage openings exceeds 6m.
opening for the garage is 5 metres, and
the carport is entirely open. Therefore
the frontage remains open for 9 metres
(or 59% of the sites frontage). The
garage is the only closed portion of the
frontage, and it amounts to 41%.
The carport, garage and ancillary dwelling will
leave no front garden area.
This is not supported. The proposal

retains at least 179m2 of front garden.
Refer to the proposed site plan (DA-01).
The proposed site plan is inconsistent with

the proposed floor plan of the ancillary
dwelling, garage and carport (setback from
southern boundary not shown).
This is correct. The proposed site plan

shows the footprint of the originally
designed garage, carport and ancillary
dwelling rather than the amended
design. A condition of approval is
proposed for clarification.
The information supplied online in

trimdownload_532114 implies the planning
application has already been approved.
An email between the Councils

Development Appraisal Planner and
applicant was erroneously placed on the
internet as part of the advertised
documents. It does not form part of the
advertised documents. The content of
the email indicated that the Councils
Development Appraisal Officer was
prepared to support the proposal, but
gave no guarantees of approval and
indicated that the support was
conditional on the advertising period. No
pre-approval was given.
The proposed ancillary dwelling will overlook

and reduce the privacy of the northern
neighbour.
The north facing windows of the

ancillary dwelling have a sill height of
1.8 metres above the finished floor level
which is compliant with the applicable
acceptable solution. Refer below to
Appraisal.
Delegation
The application received four objections, and as such no subordinate delegations are
applicable and the Council must determine the application.
Author: Ben Ikin

-6-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Appraisal
i.
Use
The proposal includes a granny flat. The granny flat meets the definition of an ancillary
dwelling for the purposes of Planning Directive 4, which is as follows:
means an additional dwelling
a)
with a floor area not greater than 60m2;
b)
that is appurtenant to a single dwelling; and
c)
that shares with that single dwelling access and parking and water, sewerage,
gas, electricity and telecommunications connections and meters.
The floor area is 58m2 and the applicants have confirmed in writing that the services are to
be shared. A granny flat is considered to be appurtenant to the single dwelling to the
extent that it serves as an accessory to the single dwelling.
For the purposes of Planning Directive 4 an ancillary dwelling is included in the definition
of a single dwelling as follows:
Single dwelling means a dwelling or a dwelling and an ancillary dwelling on a lot on
which no other dwelling is situated.
As such the proposal relates to the existing single dwelling or house use on the site, and
will not change that use. A house is a permitted use in the zone.
Principle 1 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 also provides the following with
respect to use:
The use and development of land throughout the Planning Area shall be controlled
by mandatory provisions of the Parts and Schedules that constitute the Planning
Scheme, and may be further or differently controlled by the exercise of the Councils
discretion to refuse or permit development in accordance with the relevant Objectives
and Desired Future Character relating to particular Zones and Precincts respectively.
The site is in the Residential 2 zone which has the following objective:
The site is in Precinct 30B which has the following statement of desired future character:
Author: Ben Ikin

-7-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposal will sustain and enhance the single detached character of the existing house,
ensuring that it can continue to meet the needs of the current and future families that live
in it. The proposal is considered to be of a high quality in accordance with the quality of
both contemporary and early residences. The proposal will not impact on the ability to
access the waterfront.
The proposal is therefore considered to be consistent with the applicable zone objective
and precinct statement.
ii.
Rescode
The proposal relates to a single dwelling and an ancillary dwelling as defined in Planning
Directive 4. As such Rescode is not applicable.
iii.
Planning Directive 4
Standard 1 - Setback from Frontage

The proposed ancillary dwelling is setback 6.1 metres from the frontage which complies
with acceptable solution A1.
Please note that the setback of the garage is assessed separately under Frontage
Setback and Width of Garages and Carports below.
Standard 2 - Site Coverage and Rear Setback
The proposal will have a site coverage less than 50% and a rear setback of more than 4m
in compliance with acceptable solutions A1 and A2 of this Standard.
Standard 3 - Building Envelope
Portions of the southern elevation of the garage and ancillary dwelling are outside the
prescribed building envelope. The extent of encroachment beyond the envelope is shown
in the Figure below.
Author: Ben Ikin

-8-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 6: The blue highlighting shows the extent to which the garage is outside the
prescribed building envelope. It is located on the southern boundary so the maximum
permitted height it can be at that setback is 3m. The green highlighting shows the extent to
which the ancillary dwelling is outside the prescribed building envelope. It is setback 1.2m
from the southern boundary so the maximum permitted height it can be at that setback is
4.3m.
As such the proposal must be assessed against the applicable performance criterion
which provides:
The siting and scale of single dwellings must be designed to:
(a)
ensure there is no unreasonable loss of amenity on adjoining lots by:

(i) overshadowing and reduction of sunlight to habitable rooms and private
open space to less than 3 hours between 9.00 am and 5.00 pm on June
21 or by increasing existing overshadowing where greater than above; and
(ii) overlooking and loss of privacy; and
(iii) visual impacts when viewed from adjoining lots: and
(b)
take into account steep slopes and other topographical constraints; and
(c)
have regard to streetscape qualities or be consistent with the statements of

desired future character.
The proposed garage will be adjacent to the southern neighbours existing double carport
and essentially replaces the existing double carport on the subject site. The impact of the
garages encroachment beyond the envelope is therefore considered to be acceptable.
In terms of the encroachment of the ancillary dwelling, it is noted that it will be adjacent to
the front garden of the southern neighbour and approximately 7 metres from the nearest
point of that neighbours house. This neighbour benefits from a large back garden and a
predominantly north east facing house, the vast majority of which will be unaffected by the
proposed ancillary dwelling. On this basis the extent of encroachment of the ancillary
dwelling beyond the building envelope is not considered to unreasonably impact on
sunlight to this neighbour, or to be unreasonably overbearing or intrusive for this
neighbour. The extent of encroachment will also not impinge on this neighbours privacy,
noting that the south facing windows are to be of frosted (glazing).
The extent of the ancillary dwellings encroachment is set behind the garage, so requiring
it to become compliant with the envelope would have no visible impact on the streetscape.
The proposal is considered to be consistent with this Standard.
Standard 4 - Frontage Setback and Width of Garages and Carports
Author: Ben Ikin

-9-
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposed garage and carport are set on the front boundary. The applicable
acceptable solution provides that
Garages or carports within 12m of the frontage whether free-standing or part
of the dwelling: must have:
(i)
a setback from frontage measured to the door, post or supporting column no
less than that required for a single dwelling in Standard 1 A1; or
(ii)
a setback from the primary frontage of a minimum 0.5m if the ground slopes
up or down for 10m from the frontage at more than 1:5.
The slope of the land back from the frontage is 1:5, but does not exceed 1:5, therefore
subclause (ii) is not applicable.
The required setback in Standard 1 A1 provide:
Unless within a building area shown on a plan of subdivision, the wall of a single
dwelling excluding minor protrusions) must have a setback from a frontage that is:
(a)
a minimum 4.5m from primary frontage; and a minimum 3m to a frontage other

than primary frontage; or
(b)
a distance which is not more or less than the maximum and minimum
setbacks of the dwellings on immediately adjoining lots; or
(d)
not less than the existing dwelling setback if less than 4.5m; or
(e)
for development on land that abuts a road specified in the planning scheme to
be a road to which a greater setback is to apply, the minimum setback
specified in the planning scheme in respect of that road.
For the purposes of subclause (b) Planning Directive 4 defines dwelling as:
a building, or part of a building, used as a self contained residence and which
includes food preparation facilities, a bath or shower, laundry facilities, a toilet and
sink, and any outbuilding and works normally forming part of a dwelling.
Outbuildings are further defined as follows:
means a non-habitable detached building of Class 10a of the Building Code of
Australia and includes a garage, carport or shed.
Therefore the setback requirement in Standard A1 allows a garage to be setback no more
or no less than a garage or carport on an immediately adjacent lot.
The lot to the south, 32 Red Chapel Avenue, has a carport immediately on the street
frontage:
Author: Ben Ikin

- 10 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 7: The subject sites existing carport is on the left of the image and the double carport on the
immediately adjoining lot to the south at 32 Red Chapel Avenue is to the right.
As such the proposed garage and carport being built to the boundary satisfy the
acceptable solution.
The permitted total width of garage and carport openings is set at 6m. The proposed
garage has an opening of 5 metres, and the open carport is 4m wide. The total width of
openings is therefore 9 metres, which exceeds the 6m permitted standard. Accordingly the
extent of openings must be assessed against the applicable performance criterion which
provides:
The siting and design of garages and carports must:
(a)
complement the character of the dwelling; and
(b)
not dominate the frontage of the lot through location and visual bulk; and
(c)
retain mutual passive surveillance between dwelling and road; and
(d)
provide for safe vehicular movements between road and site; and
(e)
have regard to streetscape qualities or be consistent with the statements of

desired future character.
It is noted that in assessing the above performance criteria the discretion relates only to
the width of openings, which exceeds the permitted amount by 3 metre. The question is
therefore does an additional 3 metre of opening on the frontage fail to meet any of (a) to
(e)?
With respect to (a) it is considered that the proposed additional opening will be adequately
sympathetic to the existing house it is noted that the design of the carport will allow for
views underneath to the existing dwelling:
Author: Ben Ikin

- 11 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 8. A montage of the proposed garage and carport design allowing for views below through to the
existing dwelling.
With respect to (b) the additional 3 metres of opening will not dominate the frontage, given
that the additional opening is for a carport which is completely open on two sides.
With respect to (c) due to the slope of the land the degree of mutual passive surveillance is
already limited, however the design as shown in the montage in Figure 8 will allow for
some surveillance from the house of the street, and the design certainly allows for
surveillance of the house and front garden from the street, with more than 60% of the
frontage being open.
With respect to (d) the vehicular arrangements will allow for safe ingress and egress to
and from the site onto Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay.
With respect to (d) it has already been noted above under use that the proposal accords
with the statement of desired future character. Certainly the additional 3 metres of opening
is not considered to undermine the proposals ability to comply with the statement.
Similarly the additional 3 metres of opening beyond the permitted standard is not
considered to result in a proposal that is out of keeping with the streetscape, noting the
presence of the double carport to the south for 32 Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay.
The proposal is considered to comply with this Standard.
Standard 5 - Privacy
The proposal includes a first floor deck to the existing house, which would be on the
northern side of the house and would be setback 2.7 metres from the northern boundary.
No screening is proposed. The proposal does not meet the minimum permitted setback of
3 metres so must be assessed against the applicable performance criterion which
provides:
The potential for direct overlooking from decks with a finished surface or floor
level more than 1m above natural ground level on one lot to the habitable rooms and
balconies, decks and roof gardens on adjacent lots must be avoided or minimized
through their separation or off-set or by use of solid or translucent screening.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 12 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The nearest dwelling (26 Red Chapel Avenue) to the proposed deck is over 15 metres
away. This separation is sufficient to ensure that there will be no direct overlooking of that
dwelling.
The proposed deck complies with this performance criterion.
The proposed ancillary flat has windows facing towards both the northern and southern
neighbour and which windows are within 3m of the boundary. However the north facing
windows have a sill height of 1.8m, and the south facing windows are both obscured with
frosted glazing. As such the windows are compliant with the applicable acceptable solution
for this Standard.
The proposal complies with this Standard.
Standard 6 - Frontage Fences
No front fence is proposed. This Standard is not applicable.
Conclusion
The proposal is partially for internal alterations, rear extension and deck to the existing
house. These changes are uncontroversial and supported.
The proposal also incorporates a double garage and carport set on the front boundary,
with an ancillary dwelling set back behind these elements. This aspect of the proposal is
the subject of the four objections received, with concerns being raised about the impact on
the amenity of the northern and southern neighbours, as well as about the impact on the
streetscape and character of the area.
The preceding assessment has demonstrated that the proposal is compliant with the
acceptable solutions for street setback, and invokes relatively minor discretions for the
building envelope and width of garage and carport openings. The proposal is considered
to adequately address the performance criteria applicable to the invoked discretions. The
impact on the amenity of neighbours is not considered to be unreasonable, and the
suggested detrimental impact on the streetscape and character of the area is not borne
out in the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and Planning Directive 4.
The proposal is recommended for approval with conditions and advice.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 13 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Recommendation
That:
A.
Pursuant to Part 2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the Council
approve the application for a partial demolition, house extension, alterations,
ancillary dwelling, garage, carport and storage (re-advertised - amended
proposal) at 30 Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay for the reasons outlined in
the officers report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:
1.

2.

Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2015/00208-HCC, dated 16/02/2015,
3.
The ancillary dwelling is approved for residential purposes ancillary

to the existing house on the site only. Any change of use of the
ancillary dwelling must be the subject of a separate development
application, submitted to and approved by the Council.
4.
The garage, carport and ancillary dwelling footprint as shown on site

plan DA-01 (Council date stamped 02/06/2015) is not approved. Prior
to the issue a building consent under the Building Act 2000, a revised
site plan in accordance with garage, carport and ancillary dwelling
footprint shown on plan DA-04 (Council date stamped 02/06/2015)
must be submitted to and approved by the Councils Director City
Planning. Once approved the revised site plan will form part of the
permit and must be complied with.
To address inconsistency in plans between plan DA-01 and DA04 and to clarify the scope of the permit.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 14 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
5.
20/7/2015
Prior to the issue of any building consent (including demolition),

pursuant to the Building Act 2000 or the commencement of works
(whichever occurs first), the owner must lodge with the Council a
comprehensive assessment of the condition of the Councils
infrastructure (existing property service connection points, roads,
buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway crossovers and nature
strips) at the road frontage and adjacent to the site.
This assessment shall be to the satisfaction of the Councils Director
City Infrastructure and include:
(i)
Comprehensive video and photograph records;
(ii)
Written assessment;
(iii)
Pavement condition report;
(iv) Detailed survey;

(v)
Details of ongoing monitoring; and
(vi) Details of a post-completion survey.

The above assessment will be relied upon to establish the extent of
damage caused to the Councils infrastructure during construction. In
the event that the developer fails to provide a pre-construction
assessment of the site then any damage to the Councils
responsibility of the owner and must be repaired within 30 days of
demand, to the satisfaction of the Councils Director City
Infrastructure, and at the owners cost.
Advice: The Councils Project and Development Inspector must be
contacted on telephone (03) 6238 2967 at least 24 hours prior to the
commencement of any works to locate and inspect public
infrastructure within and adjacent to the development site.
Any damage to the Councils infrastructure (existing property service
connection points, roads, buildings, stormwater, footpaths, driveway
crossovers and nature strips) during construction must be reported to
the inspector within five working days.
and/or reinstated at the owners full cost.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 15 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
6.
20/7/2015
The new vehicle access/driveway crossover must be constructed

prior to the first occupation/new use of the building.
Detailed design drawings of the proposed vehicle access over the
highway reservation must be in accordance with the Tasmanian
Standard Drawings (IPWEA) TSD-R09-v1 Urban Roads Driveways,
TSD-R16-v1 Concrete Kerbs and Channels Vehicular Crossings by a
suitably qualified person to the satisfaction of the Councils Director
City Infrastructure, must be submitted prior to the issue of a building
permit.
Advice: Concrete slabs over the gutter are no longer permissible as
per the requirements of the Hobart City Councils Highways By-law,
By-law 3 of 2008. To provide trafficable gradient transitions a
concrete plinth to the Councils standards may be constructed at the
gutter. A drawing of a standard concrete plinth can be obtained from
the Councils Technical Officer Roads.
Prior to the commencement of development works, the owner must
obtain a permit to temporarily open up and occupy a highway
(pursuant to Section 46 of the Local Government (Highways) Act
1982) for any privately undertaken works in the highway reservation.
This permit will include items such as hours of work, road safety,
reinstatement etc. The application form and advice regarding the
permit requirements can be found on the Councils website
www.hobartcity.com.au.
Once a permit has been issued the developer must contact the
Councils Project and Development Inspector on telephone (03) 6238
2967 at least 48 hours notice prior to the commencement of any
works. Completed applications for a permit to temporarily open up
and occupy a highway must be accompanied by a safe work method
statement.
The agreement of the Councils Manager Road and Environmental
Engineering is required to adjust footpath levels to suit the design of
any proposed floor levels or entrances to the development prior to
the issue of any building permit.
Typical Property Access and Driveway Profile drawings can be
accessed on the Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT)
website www.lgat.tas.gov.au.
To ensure that all works are undertaken to the Councils
standards.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 16 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
7.
20/7/2015
The driveway and car parking areas must be constructed prior to the
first occupation/new use of the building.
The proposed driveway and car parking areas must comply with the
Australian/New Zealand Standard, Parking Facilities Part 1: Off-street
Car Parking (AS/NZS 2890.1:2004) and the Councils standards
including the following:
(i)
Vertical alignment must include transition curves at all grade

changes greater than 12.5% (1 in 8) for uphill grade changes or
15% (1 in 6.7) for downhill grade changes;
(ii)
Parking areas must not exceed a maximum grade of 5% (1 in

20);
(iii)
Minimum width must be 3.0 metres;
(iv) Fully dimensioned horizontal and vertical geometry (plan view);

(v)
Construction details in a typical cross-section(s) including any

proposed barriers; and
(vi) Drainage details (crossfalls, kerblines, spot levels, pits and

reticulation details, pipe material, class and gradients).
Design drawings for the driveway demonstrating compliance with the
above requirements must be submitted to and approved by the
Councils Director City Planning prior to the issue of any building
consent, (including demolition), or the commencement of works
(whichever occurs first). Once approved the design drawings will
form part of this permit and must be complied with.
In the interests of vehicle user safety and the amenity of the
development.
8.
Prior to the issue of a certificate of occupancy, a new stormwater

connection, if required, must be constructed and any redundant
connections be abandoned by the Council. This will be at the owners
cost and the new connection at a size appropriate to satisfy the
needs of the development.
pursuant to the Building Act 2000 or any plumbing consent, or the
commencement of works (whichever occurs first), engineering
drawings detailing the connection to the Councils infrastructure must
be submitted to and approved by the Councils Director City
Infrastructure. Once approved, the engineering drawings will form
part of this permit and must be complied with.
Advice: Engineering drawings must detail materials and gradients of
new connections and show all existing connections. The Urban
Author: Ben Ikin

- 17 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Drainage Act 2013 requires a single connection point to be wholly

contained within the boundaries of the property.
To ensure the site is drained adequately.
9.
Prior to the issue of a certificate of occupancy, stormwater from the

proposed development (including hardstand runoff and rainwater
tank overflows) must be discharged to the Councils infrastructure at
the owners cost.
commencement of works (whichever occurs first), design drawings of
the proposed stormwater drainage and connection to the Councils
infrastructure, prepared by a suitably qualified person, must be
submitted to and approved by the Councils Director City
Infrastructure and the Councils Director City Planning
Design drawings must include appropriate long section(s)/levels and
grades to the point of discharge. Once approved the design drawings
will form part of this permit and must be complied with.
Advice: All stormwater where practicable must be gravity reticulated
to the Councils infrastructure.
10. Prior to the issue of a building permit/approved drawings, or

commencement of works (whichever occurs first), a soil and water
management plan detailing proposed sediment and erosion control
measures must be submitted to and approved by the Councils
Director City Planning. The approved control measures must be
installed prior to any disturbance of soil or vegetation and be
regularly inspected and maintained during the
construction/demolition period to prevent soil and other materials
entering the local stormwater system, roadways or adjoining
properties. The approved control measures must remain in place
until such time as all disturbed areas have been stabilised using
vegetation and/or restored or sealed to the satisfaction of the
Council. The approved soil and water management plan forms part of
this permit and must be complied with.
Advice: For further guidance on preparing soil and water
management control measures, please refer to the fact sheets on the
Derwent Estuary Programs website www.derwentestuary.org.au .
Author: Ben Ikin

- 18 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Legislation.
11. Prior to the issue of any building consent (including demolition),
pursuant to the Building Act 2000 or the commencement of works
(whichever occurs first), a demolition/waste management plan must
be submitted that addresses, but is not limited to, storage, handling
and disposal of demolition waste, any re-use, recycling and sorting of
demolition and/or post construction waste material. The plan must be
Infrastructure and Director City Planning. Once approved the solid
waste management documentation will form part of this permit and
must be complied with.
The demolition/waste management documentation must include, but
not be limited to, the following information:
(i)
(ii)
Provisions for the handling, transport and disposal of postconstruction solid waste from the development; and
Provisions for the handling transport and disposal of demolition
material, including any contaminated waste.
Advice: Should you have any queries in relation to solid waste

management issues Council staff can assist with the development of
a waste management strategy outlining the benefits of waste
minimisation, recycling and re-use, and the additional financial
benefits gained with reduction of tip fees at time of disposal, from
following those waste separation processes. Please contact the
Councils Cleansing and Solid Waste Customer Liaison Officer on
telephone (03) 6238 3273.
Refer also to the development application information flyer Ten Top
Tips on the Councils website www.hobartcity.com.au.
To ensure that solid waste management from the site meets the
Councils requirements and standards.
1.
Author: Ben Ikin
Please consult your private building surveyor to ascertain whether

the proposal requires approval under the Building Act 2000. Where
approval is required this is to be obtained from the Council prior to
the commencement of any works.

- 19 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
2.

with the Building Act 2000, the Plumbing Regulations 2014 and the
Tasmanian Plumbing Code, and a permit issued prior to the
commencement of any plumbing work on site.
3.
The designer must ensure that the needs of all providers including
TasWater, TasGas, TasNetworks, and Telstra are catered for both in
the design and construction of the works. Underground service
providers should be contacted for line marking of their services and
any requirements or conditions they may have prior to commencing
any works on site. Phone 1100, Dial Before You Dig or visit
www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for information on the location of
underground services and cables in relation to the proposed
development prior to commencing any works on site.
(Ben Ikin)
(Ian Stanley)
Date of Report:
Author: Ben Ikin

- 20 -
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

30 Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay
Description
Drawing
Application Form
15-00123-01
Title
72320/5
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: EX-01
Existing floor plan
Revision No: Drawn by: GAETANO PALMESE
Date of Drawing: 10 FEB 2015
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: EX-02
Existing elevations
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: DA-01
Proposed site plan
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: DA-02
Proposed floor plan - house
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: DA-03
Proposed elevations - house
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: DA-04
Proposed floor plan granny flat Revision No: Drawn by: GAETANO PALMESE
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: DA-05
Proposed elevations granny
Revision No: flat
Drawn by: GAETANO PALMESE
Author: Ben Ikin

- 21 -
Date of
Lodgement to
Council
10 Feb 2015
10 Feb 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
Site section
Street view montage
Email confirm ancillary flat
Author: Ben Ikin
Project No: x1407

Drawing No: DA-06
Project No: x1407
Drawing No: 3D-01
Author: Luke Taylor
Date: 3 June 2015

- 22 -
20/7/2015
02 June 2015
02 June 2015
03 June 2015
File Ref: 5636294 P/30/784
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066

Council
Planning Permit PLN-15-00123-01
No.
TasWater details
TasWater
TWDA 2015/00208-HCC
Reference No.
TasWater
David Boyle
Contact
Response issued to
Council notice
12/02/2015
date
Date of response 16/02/2015

Phone No. 6345 6323

Development details
Address 30 RED CHAPEL AVE, SANDY BAY
Property ID (PID)
5636294
Description of
House Extension
development
Prepared by
Gaetano Palmese Architects
Revision No.
X1407 DA-04
Date of Issue
10/02/2015
Conditions
Pursuant to the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 (TAS) Section 56P(1) TasWater imposes the
following conditions on the permit for this application:
CONNECTIONS, METERING
ADVICE
TasWater property connections (water & sewer) are not to be located within the foot print of the carport and
garage, if they do occur in the footprint of the proposed building then the developer must pay to have them
relocated clear of the footprint. At the Building application stage drawings will need to show the location of any
property connection. (water & sewer)
CONDITION
1.
2.
Prior to commencing construction, a boundary backflow prevention device and water meter must be installed,
to the satisfaction of TasWater in accordance with condition 1 where relevant.

3.
4.
The applicant or landowner as the case may be, must pay a development assessment and
Consent to register a Legal Document fee to TasWater for this proposal of:
1. $203.22 for development assessment; and
as approved by the Economic Regulator and the fees will be indexed as approved by the
Economic Regulator until the date they are paid to TasWater. The payment is required within 30
days of the issue of an invoice by TasWater which will be when an application for Certificate(s) for
Certifiable Work (Building) and/or (Plumbing) is made.
Advice
Page 1 of 2
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066
infrastructure.
Declaration
Authority Notice.
Authorised by
Jason Taylor
Page 2 of 2
GAETANO PALMESE ARCHITECTS
TASMANIA REGISTERED ARCHITECT No: 888

TASMANIA BUILDING PRACTITIONER ACCREDITATION No: CC 6164 O
ABN: 34 934 298 65
NOMINATED ARCHITECT: GAETANO PALMESE

NSW ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD No: 6866
C 2560
C 2560
200 STEP
TO BEAM
C 2230
TO FLOOR
LEGEND
150 STEP
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
WALLS TO BE DEMOLISHED
EXISTING WALLS
SHWR / WC
LAUNDRY
150 STEP
C 2600
110 STEP
C 2560
KITCHEN
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858

gaetano @ gaetanopalmese.com
www.gaetanopalmese.com
22 SALAMANCA SQ BATTERY PT TASMANIA 7004

LEVEL 2 / 9 ROSLYN ST POTTS POINT NSW 2011
GAETANO
PALMESE
UPPER FLOOR
ENTRY
PORCH
DINING ROOM
LOUNGE ROOM
CUPB
C 2760
BEDROOM 3
FLOOR LEVEL
RL 69.910
HALL
5M
CUPB
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
GARAGE
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
EXISTING PLANS
EX-01
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
30 RED CHAPEL AVE _ SANDY BAY
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
BEDROOM 2
BATHROOM
BEDROOM 1
NOTE
1. DO NOT SCALE DIMENSIONS FROM PRINTED DRAWING
2. VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE
LOWER FLOOR
C 2560
FAMILY ROOM

received on the 02/06/2015.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
UPPER FLOOR
RL 69.910
CEILING
RL 72.670
2760
290
UPPER FLOOR
RL 69.910
CEILING
RL 72.670
LOWER FLOOR
RL 67.060
2560
2760
220
FACE RED BRICK

ABN: 34 934 298 65

CORRUGATED IRON ROOF
FACE RED BRICK
LEGEND
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
R
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858


GAETANO
PALMESE
FACE RED BRICK
FACE RED BRICK
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
EX-02
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
EXISTING ELEVATIONS
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE

DOCUMENT
GARAGE DOOR
NOTE
LOWER FLOOR
RL 67.060
2560
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
OUTLINE OF
EXISTING GARAGE
TO BE DEMOLISHED
PROPOSED
GRANNY FLAT
EXISTING
HOUSE
NO. 32
LEGEND
EXISTING
HOUSE
30 RED CHAPEL AVE
PLANTER
69
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
21040'00" 72.08
STEPPED BRICK WALL
CONCRETE
LAWN
PATH
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858


GAETANO
PALMESE
EXISTING
SHED
NEW
ADDITION
PALING FENCE
LAWN
63
WATER
PIT
CONCRETE RAMP
AT
H
GARDEN
66
GARDEN
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
PALING FENCE
EXISTING
GREEN HOUSE
REMAINS OF MESH FENCE IN IVY HEDGE
X1407
1:200 @ A3
SITE PLAN
DWG
NO.
DATE
DA-01
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
61

ABN: 34 934 298 65
REMOVE
TREE
CO
NC
RE
TE
P
3040'00" 72.06
NTS
LOCATION PLAN
12038'40" 15.24
60

LAWN
CONCRETE PATH
67
30 RED CHAPEL AVE
RED CHAPEL AVE
NOTE
1:200
74
INING WALL
TOE OF RETA
73
SITE PLAN
30044'20" 15.24

65
DOCUMENT
62
POWER POLE
RED CHAPEL AVENUE
Spike
at edge
of path
CONCRETE PATH
REMOVE
TREE
70
CONCRETE STEPS
CO
N
C
RE
TE
RETAINING WALL
CONCRETE
CONCRETE STEPS
PA
TH
71
PATH
CONCRETE
RETAINING WALL
SLEEPER
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
64
68
72

ABN: 34 934 298 65

NEW SLIDING
DOOR
200 STEP
RL 67.360
LDY /
STORE
NEW
DOOR
700
LEGEND
S1
RL 67.560
EXIST. RAMP
180
280
BATH
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
LDY / STORE
WC
BATHRM
RAISE
FLOOR
KID'S
BEDROOM 2
ENLARGE EXISTING WINDOW
2430
3200
BOUNDAR
R
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858

ENTRY
PORCH
FORMAL
LOUNGE /
TV ROOM
NEW
PIVOT
DOOR
NEW SLIDING
DOOR
2355
10010
EXIST.
CUPB.
RL 69.910
ENTRY
HALL
4360
BEDROOM 1
4855
EXISTING
SLIDING DOORS
SITTING
BANQUETTE SEAT
STORAGE UNDER
UPPER FLOOR
TV
2400
DECK

GAETANO
PALMESE

DOCUMENT
2700 NOM
NEW SLIDING
DOOR
BOUNDAR
NOTE
RL 67.060
SHARED
PLAY
AREA
NEW SLIDING DOOR
3350
3240
NEW SEAT
& SCREEN
10370
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
OPENING
WC
P.R.
NEW
DOOR
900
STOVE
800
700
SEAT
CHUTE
STUDY /
GUEST ROOM
PANTRY
FRIDGE
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
S1
2910
NEW W.I.R. &

EN-SUITE WITHIN
EXIST. GARAGE
2300 NOM
6660
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
PLANS / HOUSE
DA-02
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
NEW WINDOW & WALL WITHIN

EXISTING GARAGE DOOR OPENING
EN-S
RL 70.120
W.I.R.
STEP
UP
KITCH
DOUBLE
SINK
DINING
3360
4855
S1
KID'S
BEDROOM 1
LOWER FLOOR
STORE
NEW
DOOR
2430
NEW EXTERNAL CONCRETE DECK
700
NEW SLIDING
DOOR
180
3130
2280
3820
280
1500
1000
BANQUETTE SEAT
STORAGE UNDER
CUPBS
BOUNDAR
100
2600
280
1080
900
1000
700
800
S1
BOUNDAR
WC
3680
2130
890
1410
3680
1950
3860
3420
2090
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
2760
2760
2170

ABN: 34 934 298 65

EXISTING
WINDOW
EXIST.
WINDOW
MODIFIED
NORTH-WEST ELEVATION
NEW
SLIDING
DOOR
SOUTH-EAST ELEVATION
GARAGE FLOOR LEVEL
EXISTING
WINDOW
NEW
ACCESS
DOOR
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXISTING FACE BRICK
EXISTING CORRUGATED
METAL ROOF
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXISTING FACE RED BRICK
EXISTING CORRUGATED
METAL ROOF
LEGEND
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXISTING
WINDOW
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXISTING
WINDOW
EXIST.
NEW
WINDOW WINDOW
MODIFIED
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
R
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
SLIDING
DOOR
T 0408 018 858

NORTH-EAST ELEVATION
EXISTING
FACE BRICK
ENLARGE
EXISTING
WINDOW
NEW
WINDOW
EXISTING CORRUGATED
METAL ROOF
NEW
SLIDING
DOOR
EXISTING FACE BRICK

EXISTING
WINDOW
SOUTH-WEST ELEVATION
EXISTING
WINDOW

GAETANO
PALMESE
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
WINDOW
DOCUMENT
NEW WINDOW
WITHIN EXISTING
GARAGE DOOR
OPENING
EXISTING
WINDOW
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
NEW
WINDOW
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
DA-03
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
ELEVATIONS / HOUSE
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
EXISTING
WINDOW

5M
EXISTING CORRUGATED METAL ROOF
NOTE
LOWER FLOOR
RL 67.060
2560
290
UPPER FLOOR
RL 69.910
CEILING
RL 72.670
LOWER FLOOR
RL 67.060
2560
UPPER FLOOR
RL 69.910
290 220
CEILING
RL 72.670
600
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
1000
4400
800
9000
5000
LEGEND
S1
BOUNDARY
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
250
BOUNDARY
R
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858


GAETANO
PALMESE
RETAIN
EXISTING
TREE
100
800
900 100 1000
OPEN
PERGOLA
OVER
CARPORT
100
KITCHEN
DINING
3500
10900
3000
30044'20"
RL 74.830
15240
OPEN CARPORT
COVERED ENTRY
1 BEDROOM
GRANNY FLAT
RL 74.930
LOUNGE
3500
BATH
QUEEN SIZE
BEDROOM
3500
S1
RL 74.880
GARAGE
IN PLACE OF
EXISTING
GARAGE
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
1200 NOM
100
BOUNDARY
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
DA-04
1 JUNE 2015
REV
NO.
PLANS / GARAGE & GRANNY FLAT
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
6200
ADJUST EXISTING CROSSOVER TO SUIT
FOOTPATH
CARPORT
LDY
100
6200
250
FOOTPATH
200
3250
15240
3050 NOM
6000

ABN: 34 934 298 65
250
30044'20"
RL 72.260
250 900
4200
SUBFLOOR SPACE
STORE
RL 72.240
STORE
4850
1200 NOM
100

3750
PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
250
900
900
5200
NOTE
BOUNDARY
DOCUMENT
1800
EXISTING
TREE
3400
9200
5400
4000
ROLLER DOOR

100
900 100
EXISTING HOUSE
100
3600
3300
6100
EXISTING HOUSE
5300
1500
1000
HIGH LEVEL WINDOW
100
WC
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
100
6200
250
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY

ABN: 34 934 298 65
TIMBER
CLADDING
NEW
WINDOW
LEGEND
NEW
WINDOW
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
EXISTING
GROUND
1800
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
ROLLER
DOOR
T 0408 018 858

NORTH-WEST ELEVATION
TIMBER
CLADDING
MASONRY
HANDRAIL
CARPORT
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
PARAPET
RL 77.930
EXISTING GROUND
LOWER FLOOR
RL 72.230
UPPER FLOOR
RL 74.930
X1407
1:100 @ A3
DWG
NO.
DATE
DA-05
1 JUNE 2015
REV
NO.
ELEVATIONS / GARAGE & GRANNY FLAT
LOWER FLOOR
RL 72.230
UPPER FLOOR
RL 74.930
FOOTPATH
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
TIMBER
CLADDING
NEW HIGHLIGHT
WINDOW
NEW
WINDOW

OPEN PERGOLA OVER CARPORT
MASONRY
TIMBER
CLADDING
DOCUMENT
NEW TRANSLUCENT
WINDOW
FASCIA
SOUTH-EAST ELEVATION

GAETANO
PALMESE
EXISTING
GROUND
FOOTPATH
MASONRY
20/7/2015

NORTH-EAST ELEVATION
TIMBER
CLADDING
NEW
NEW
WINDOW
WINDOW
TIMBER
CLADDING
NEW
WINDOW
NEW
WINDOW
SOUTH-WEST (STREET) ELEVATION
FASCIA
GARAGE
DOOR
FASCIA
MODIFY CROSSOVER TO SUIT
OPEN
CARPORT
TIMBER
CLADDING
PERGOLA OVER CARPORT

600
2400
2400
PARAPET
RL 77.930
NOTE
EXISTING TREE
600
2400
2400
900
CPC Agenda
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
STORE

ABN: 34 934 298 65

BATHROOM
BEDROOM
LEGEND
NEW WORK
NEW WALLS
EXISTING WALLS
EXISTING GROUND
LOWER FLOOR
RL 72.230
UPPER FLOOR
RL 74.930
LOWER FLOOR
RL 67.060
UPPER FLOOR
RL 69.910
CEILING
RL 72.670
C
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
W.I.R
T 0408 018 858

WC
PANTRY
BATHROOM
GUEST BEDROOM
LDY

GAETANO
PALMESE
ENSUITE
DINING
5M
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
X1407
1:100 @ A3
SITE SECTION
DWG
NO.
DATE
2400
DA-06
REV
NO.
10 FEBRUARY 2015
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE

DOCUMENT
KIDS BEDROOM
KITCHEN / LIVING
2700
NOTE
SECTION 1
EXISTING GROUND AT
RED CHAPEL AVE
2400
600
2400
2400
GARAGE
2760
290
2560
PARAPET
RL 77.930
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
HOBART:
SYDNEY:
T 0408 018 858


X1306
NTS
STREET VIEW
DWG
NO.
DATE
3D-01
1 JUNE 2015
REV
NO.
PRUE & LUKE'S HOUSE
PROJECT
NO.
SCALE
DRAWING
PROJECT
ADDRESS
PROJECT
GAETANO
PALMESE

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

20/7/2015
6.

6.1

SCHEME 1982
6.1.4
191 AND 199 NEW TOWN ROAD, NEW TOWN NEW

BUILDING FOR UNLISTED USE (SERVICE STATION),
ALTERATIONS TO HOTEL CAR PARKING AND
CONSOLIDATION OF TITLES PLN-15-00181-01
FILE REF: 5516065 & P/199/712
190xs
(Council)
Supporting documentation in respect to this item is available in the
Aldermens Lounge and on the Aldermens webpage.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Type of Report
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
23 July 2015 (extension granted until 30 July 2015)
Application No:
PLN-15-00181-01
Address:
191 and 199 New Town Road, New Town
Applicant:
Findella c/o Kon Mantzis, Level 1,

480 Bourke Street, Melbourne, Vic
Proposal:
New Building for Unlisted Use (Service Station), Alterations to

Hotel Carparking and Consolidation of Titles
Representations:
11
Discretion:
1.
Executive Summary
1.1.
Planning approval is sought for a new building for unlisted use (service
station), alterations to hotel carparking and consolidation of Titles.
1.2.
Three (3) discretions were invoked.

1.2.1.
Use
1.2.2.
Heritage
1.2.3.
Siting
1.3.
Eleven (11) representations objecting to the proposal were received within the
statutory advertising period (2 June 2015 to 17 June 2015).
1.4.
1.5.
The final decision has been delegated to the Council.
Author: Cameron Sherriff
191 & 199 New Town Road
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
2.
20/7/2015
Site Detail
Image 1: Aerial view of the subject site and surrounds. The lines bisecting the site represent the
boundaries of each of the three titles.
2.1.
191 and 199 New Town Road as a combined site is made up of three
separate titles in common ownership, with a total area of 6,906sq.m. The two
lots closest to the intersection of New Town and Risdon Roads present as one
property accommodating the Maypole Hotel, attached BWS Bottle Shop and
associated carparking, access and manoeuvring areas. There is also a
freestanding coffee outlet located in the carpark. 199 New Town Road is
fenced off from the other titles, having more recently been in separate
ownership. This lot is primarily grassed and vacant aside from the presence of
high voltage powerlines and a support tower close to New Town Road, New
Town.
2.2.
The site of the proposed development at the rear of the Maypole Hotel is lower
than the level of New Town Road, and is effectively depressed when viewed
from the street on this frontage. The site also slopes gradually downwards to
its centre from Risdon Road and then rise again to the north-western side
boundary of 199 New Town Road, New Town.
2.3.
The area of the subject site proposed for the service station development has
for many years been used as a thoroughfare and parking area for the hotel
and associated drive-through bottle shop on the site. This bituminised area as
existing is in a reasonably poor state of repair. Garden beds in and around the
space which have not been cleared and left bare are for the most part filled
with low maintenance shrubs of moderate height. The overall feel of the area
is not overly welcoming and apart from some limited activation and the ability
to park and pass through the site the area presents as underutilised dead
space.

-2-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
2.4.
The adjoining properties to the north-west are residential, whilst to the northeast, consulting rooms and a shop (hair salon), as well as a residential
property extend rearwards in this configuration along the north-eastern side
boundary.
2.5.
Opposite across New Town Road is the Pizza Hut restaurant and Ogilvie High
School. Opposite on Risdon Road is the New Town Plaza Shopping Centre.
Additional commercial properties, including a car yard surround the
intersection of New Town Road, Risdon Road, Forster Street and Montagu
Street, New Town. A mix of residential and commercial properties extend
further afield.
2.6.
Images 2 through 9 provide various views of the subject site.
Image 2: The interior of the site is lower than New Town Road.
Image 3: Looking towards the rear of the site of the proposed service station from the
propertys Risdon Road frontage.

-3-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Image 4: The vacant Residential 1 Zoned lot at 199 New Town Road.
Image 5: The approximate location of the car parking area to be cut into the 199 New Town
Road lot.
Image 6: Looking to the north-eastern rear corner of the site. The tan building behind the
green container is the only adjoining residential development.

-4-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Image 7: Looking back towards New Town Road from the north-eastern corner of the site.
Image 8: Looking west towards New Town Road. The proposed service station would replace
the central parking spaces in the midground. Note the powerline towers adjacent.
Image 9: The view from directly opposite the subject site from Pizza Hut on New Town Road.

-5-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
3.
20/7/2015
Proposal
3.1. The proposal seeks approval for the development of a service station upon the
site.
3.2.
The service station would be located within the rear car park area of the
existing Maypole Hotel and would extend across existing boundary lines.
3.3.
The development would extend partially into a vacant lot to the north-west of
the existing bitumen car park, where high-voltage powerlines run within a
wayleave easement.
3.4.
Alterations to part of the existing parking arrangement at the rear of the

Maypole Hotel would occur as part of the development. Overall twenty existing
parking spaces would be displaced, with 28 new spaces proposed in and
around the proposed service station, to be shared across all site uses.
3.5.
The proposed service station would consist of a 4.8 metre high flat-roofed
canopy over six refuelling points, with an associated shop at the rear, in what
is now a common configuration for a service station. The proposed structures
would primarily address New Town Road, albeit set back approximately 14m
from the New Town Road property boundary, and at a lower ground level than
the road itself.
3.6.
Primary access to the proposed service station would be provided by new

dedicated in and out ramps from/to New Town Road. These would replace the
current combined in/out ramp from New Town Road, and would be located to
either side of the current access point. Access and egress can also be gained
from Risdon Road via the current arrangement which would remain
unchanged.
3.7.
The proposed new and rearranged carparking would run perpendicular to the
proposed service station, as well as in an improved area to the rear of the
shop building of the service station, in the vicinity of the drive-through coffee
container currently existing on the site. New kerbing in and around the service
station and parking areas, with associated retaining walls to account for cross
slope are also proposed. The parking area at the north-western end of the site
would be cut into a vacant, grassed gently sloping bank towards the alignment
of the high-voltage wires running through this end of the site.
3.8.
Between the front of the service station canopy and the New Town Road
frontage of the property, between the new access and egress points, five
underground fuel storage tanks and an underground LPG tank are proposed.
Associated fuel vents would be placed within a landscaped bed adjacent to the
property frontage in this area.
3.9.
Landscape beds are proposed in and around the site of the proposed service
station and revised car parking areas.
3.10. No signage is proposed in the application. It is likely that signage would be

applied for separately in the event that this application is successful.

-6-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
4.
5.
20/7/2015
Background
4.1.
The site has been used as a hotel for perhaps over 100 years. The current
hotel and bottle shop operate independent of each other so are effectively two
separate uses.
4.2.
In August 2010 approval was granted by the Council for a shipping container
to be used as a drive-through coffee operation located towards the northern
rear corner of the existing carpark. This business continues to operate but
would however be displaced by the proposed service station development.

5.1.
Insufficient demand for an
additional service station. Not
viable as is evidenced by several
closed service station sites in the
area.
Heritage Impact - Proposal does

not adequately address the extent
of heritage impact upon the
Maypole hotel. 5m high LPG tank
will be an eyesore.
The suggestion of no signage

being proposed is fanciful.
Safety concerns associated with

the developments proximity to
high voltage transmission lines.
Public risk. Terrorist target. Lack
of protection of TasNetwork
assets.
Traffic - Unreasonable impact

upon traffic flows, the road
network and pedestrian safety,
particularly students of nearby
schools. Access to nearby
properties affected by extra
banked traffic. Cyclists ignored.
Displacement of bus stop.
Amenity Impact - Residential
amenity noise impact associated
with 24 hour operation,
contributing to existing impact of
hoons in the surrounding streets
and commercial complex. Lighting
Impact. Affect access to power
lines and tower, and access to
adjoining residential blocks.
Devalue properties. Fumes will
affect residential amenity, as well
as garden health.
Lack of Scheme compliance Inconsistency with statement of
desired future character and
Zones. Increased front setback
not compliant with Scheme
standards. Principle 22 and
Schedule D.
Environmental Concerns
proximity to watercourse
Impacts of underground tanks,
leakage, pollution.

-7-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Encourages channelling of petrol

customers to the adjacent bottle
shop. Would lead to service
stations being allowed to sell
alcohol. Not sound planning
practice or policy.
6.
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within the commercial and residential 1 zones of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
6.2.
The objective of the commercial and residential zone at part 5.5 of the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 is:
to provide for a diversity of commercial and professional uses and some
important associated residential uses at densities responsive to the character
of historic areas and buildings and/or adjacent Precincts.
6.3.
That part of the site zoned commercial and residential falls within the New
Town Road precinct No. 18 where the statement of desired future character
under Part 5.5.5 of the scheme states;
The Precinct should continue to be an appropriate location for local shopping
facilities and major road commercial uses as well as for residential flat
development. Sub-regional shopping facilities and industrial development
should be restricted generally to existing establishments.
Increased provision of seating and shelter for pedestrians is desirable, as is an
improvement to the quality of the townscape by landscaping of street
frontages.
6.4.
The title for 199 New Town Road, within which twelve car parking spaces
associated with the development are proposed, is zoned residential 1. The
objective of this zone under part 5.7 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982 states;
to sustain and enhance the character and amenity of established residential
areas with diverse dwelling-types with minimal intrusion or further
development of non-residential uses not necessary to serve local residents.
6.5.
That part of the site within the residential 1 zone falls within the East New
Town precinct No. 17 where the statement of desired future character under
part 5.7.2 of the scheme states:
The Precinct should continue as an inner urban residential area consisting
principally of single detached houses set mainly on small to standard size
allotments. Changes of use of existing buildings to flats and accommodation
hostels may be permitted in appropriate locations close to institutional uses
and Risdon Road and New Town Road. Commercial activities will generally
be restricted to existing non-conforming uses or be allowed on the scale of a
domestic business. However, local shops may be permitted in conjunction
with existing residential use where there is a lack of such facility in the vicinity.

-8-
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The properties shown on Map A1 may be used for a variety of commercial

uses in accordance with Schedule A primarily to facilitate the reuse of the
existing institutional buildings. Any development on these properties shall
ensure that the amenity of the surrounding residential area is maintained. The
properties should not be used solely for office purposes or to accommodate a
major office development that would be more appropriately located in Zones 1,
2 or 3. Any application for development likely to significantly increase traffic
volumes will be required to be accompanied by a traffic impact assessment.
6.6.
6.7.

6.6.1.
Schedule A Use
6.6.2.
Schedule B Density
6.6.3.
Schedule C Height
6.6.4.
Schedule D Siting and Landscaping
6.6.5.
Schedule E Traffic, Access and Parking
6.6.6.
Schedule F Heritage
6.6.7.
Part 4 Principles of Development Control.

6.7.1.
Discretion Table
CHPS requirement
Discretion 1
Discretion 2
Use
Schedule A.7.1b) the

Council may use its
discretion to refuse or
permit the development
and use of land
unconditionally or
subject to conditions:
b) for a use considered
to be not listed within a
Use Group pursuant to
Section A.3.1
Heritage Schedule F.6.1 The
Council has a discretion
to refuse or permit any
proposed use or
development: (i) within or adjacent
to a place listed
on the Heritage
Register.

-9-
Proposed
development
A service
station is not
considered to
be part of any
defined Use
Group.
The title upon

which the
Maypole hotel
is located is
listed on the
Heritage
Register. It is
also listed on
the Tasmanian
Heritage
Register.
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
Discretion 3
6.7.2.
Siting
20/7/2015
D.6.1(b)
Development to be set
back a minimum of 3
metres from the centre
of any piped
watercourse.
The
development is
in close
proximity to the
piped Maypole
Rivulet.
Discretion 1 - Use
As an unlisted use, the proposed service station is not immediately
considered an acceptable use within either zone existing on the site.
However given its location at the edge of a well-established
commercial hub and within the curtilage of an existing commercial
property, the characteristics and location of the subject site are
considered to benefit the proposed use, regardless of the applicable
zone.
The proposed use would not displace any existing use, but would
however complement those uses already occurring on the site, which
is entirely commercial in nature. No existing residential uses occur
on either the 191 New Town Road titles or upon the residential 1
zoned 199 New Town Road title, which is influenced by the wayleave
easement.
With regard to the objective of the commercial and residential zone,
the proposal is considered complementary. There is nothing within
the statement of desired future character for precinct 18 that
expressly rules out service stations. The proposed commercial use
is associated with an existing commercial site.
In terms of the objective of the residential 1 zone, whilst the service
station would not solely serve local residents, it would not preclude
their access either. Regardless, given the extent of the
developments intrusion into that part of the overall site zoned
Residential 1 (12 car parking spaces and a section of access
driveway, landscaping and kerbing), the degree of intrusion is
considered to be minimal. The statement of desired future character
for Precinct 17 is not necessarily supportive of the proposed use,
however due to the minimal intrusion mentioned above, and the
presence of commercial uses adjacent and beyond, this
inconsistency is not considered to be a significant factor.
The wayleave easement extending across 199 New Town Road
would reduce this sites desirability as a site for residential
development. Additionally, the location of the support tower and
wires extending across the site would impact upon the development
potential of the site, reducing the area available for buildings. The
proposal includes minimal development in close proximity to the
power lines, and the new buildings would maintain a reasonable
setback. The proposal has the in principle support of TasNetworks.

- 10 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Part 5.1.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 provides an

ability for adjustment to the relevant controls to create a gradual
transition of use and building form from one precinct to another
where development is in close proximity to the boundary between
two dissimilar precincts. Such development must still not detract
from the attainment of the desired future character of either precinct.
Precinct 17 is an established, older residential precinct where the
character is set. The minimal intrusion into this precinct by the
development, and without buildings extending within, the character of
the precinct is considered to be adequately protected.
6.7.3.
Discretion 2 - Heritage
The larger of the two 191 New Town Road titles (where the Maypole
Hotel is located) is listed for heritage significance under Schedule F
of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. It is also listed on the
Tasmanian Heritage Register. In accordance with Schedule F.6.1,
the Council has a discretion to refuse or permit any proposed use or
development upon or adjacent to such a property.
Accordingly, the proposed development has been referred to and
assessed by both the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer and also the
Tasmanian Heritage Council. The Councils Cultural Heritage Officer
has prepared the following assessment and conclusions:
i) View from New Town Road.
ii) Area of proposed Service Station
The development application for the above site is for the removal of
a large mature tree and nature strip, and the erection of a Service
Station with associated open canopy and car parking, whilst also
seeking to rearrange existing car parking on the site and consolidate
titles within the wider site.
The site is consists of a Heritage Listed Public House (known as The
Maypole) with associated Bottle Shop as well as a wide strip of open
land associated with the position of electricity pylons that run
immediate next to the site. The site is also Heritage Listed with THC
and is therefore considered to be of State importance. The proposals
must therefore be assessed against Schedule F of the Hobart City

- 11 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Schedule F stipulates that;

F.4.4 Any new development within or adjacent to a place listed on
the Heritage Register shall be in keeping with and shall not detract
from those characteristics of the place which contribute to its cultural
significance.
The proposed Service Station and associated canopy would sit close
to the roadside and largely set the context in which The Maypole
would be viewed when approaching from the north along New Town
Road.
It is acknowledged that at present, the immediate context of the Hotel
is generally commercial in nature, taking the form of car parking and
associated signage and there is an argument that the site already
suffers from considerable visual clutter. However, some limited
landscaping is present and significantly, the combination of a two
roadside trees, one of which is large and very visually prominent, and
the undeveloped open land associated with the Pylons, creates a
robust green buffer that significantly softens the context of the Hotel
when approached in this direction.
It is noted that both of the trees and the open land would be lost as a
result of the development to be replaced by the Service Station, its
canopy and associated car parking and hard standing. It is therefore
considered that the proposal has the ability to significantly alter the
streetscape context of the Heritage Listed Hotel, eroding open views
of the building and effectively enclosing it with commercial
development.
Given the commercial nature of the site, it is considered
unreasonable to refuse the proposal. However, it is considered
reasonable to seek the mitigation of the worse visual impact of the
proposal. Whilst a small degree of landscaping between the new
Service Station and Hotel is proposed, it entirely consists of low
scrub native plants that would have no impact whatsoever in
softening the visual impact of the proposal. It is therefore considered
that a far more robust landscaping scheme be sought by way of
condition to sit between the Hotel and the Service Station to retain
some sense of the Hotels original setting
It is therefore considered that subject to the above, the proposal
complies with the Schemes heritage requirements.

- 12 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Suggested Condition
Prior the issue of any building consent under the Building Act 2000,
amended plans detailing a comprehensive landscaping plan, which
will provide visual separation and a landscaped buffer between the
new building development and the rear of the Maypole Hotel. The
plan shall indicate the species of trees and shrubs proposed which
shall be medium sized along with additional low scale planting. The
plan must be submitted for approval by Councils Senior Statutory
Planner. When approved, the amended plans will form part of this
permit and must be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction
of the Council
To ensure that setting of the Maypole Hotel is conserved and
impacts of the new development on the heritage values of the
place are mitigated.
The Tasmanian Heritage Council has granted a permit for the
proposed development with a similar condition requiring a
landscaped buffer to be incorporated into a comprehensive plan for
the site.
6.7.4.
Discretion 3 Siting
The discretion raised in the proposal with regard to proximity to the
nearby Maypole Rivulet watercourse has been considered by the
Councils environmental development planner, whose assessment,
which addresses some additional environmental concerns relating to
the concerns of the representors, can be found in the discussion
section of this report.
7.
Discussion
7.1.
Referral officer comments

7.1.1.
The Councils environmental development planner provides the

following assessment of the proposal:
Approval is sought to establish a service station and car park at 191
and 199 New Town Road, New Town. The area is currently a mix of
vacant land and car parking areas.
Stormwater Management
Stormwater from beneath the canopy area would be directed to
sewer via an oil interceptor. Runoff from the rest of the site would be
directed to the Councils stormwater system via a gross pollutant trap
(GPT). Filtration gardens are also proposed to pre-treat stormwater
from some of the site prior to entry into the GPT.

- 13 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Part A.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982

(Implementation of the State Policy on Water Quality Management)
states the following:
An application for a permit for the use or development of land
shall be accompanied by sufficient information to demonstrate
that it will not result in the transport of sediments into surface
water such that environmental harm might be caused either
during the carrying out of works, or the subsequent use of the
land.
Council shall consider the information supplied with the
application and determine whether,
a) the capability of the land is sufficient to support the use or
development without giving rise to sediment transport and
b) if there is a risk of sediment transport into surface waters,
the measures proposed to reduce such risk are adequate
Council may impose conditions on any permit to minimise the
potential for erosion or water quality degradation.
The submitted stormwater plan indicates that the GPT alone would
reduce total suspended solids (TSS) by around 89%. Further
reductions could be expected from the filtration gardens. This is
considered acceptable for the proposed use.
The works associated with construction of the development should
be managed through a Council-approved soil and water
management plan (SWMP). It is noted that Councils Environmental
Engineering Unit have recommended conditions to address both
stormwater pre-treatment and construction soil and water
management.
The proposal does not comply with clause D.6.1(b) of the planning
scheme which requires development to be set back a minimum of 3
metres from the centre of any piped watercourse. Clause D.6.2
states Council may exercise its discretion to refuse or permit any
development which departs from the setbacks specified in D.6.1.
Council will only approve a reduction in the specified setback where it
can be demonstrated that:
a) there will be minimum adverse impact upon the environment,
b) no compromising of recreational opportunities,
c) there will be no increased risk of any hazard such as flooding,
erosion or land instability level, and
d) there will be no constraint on access to a Council or other utility
service.

- 14 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposed development could have an impact upon water quality

in Maypole Creek if polluted runoff is allowed to enter the stormwater
system. Minimum adverse impact is expected subject to
implementation of the proposed stormwater pre-treatment measures
(with the detailed design to the satisfaction of EEU) and of a Councilapproved soil and water management plan.
There are no recreational opportunities on the site itself, and
downstream recreational opportunities are unlikely to be jeopardised
subject to implementation of stormwater pre-treatment measures and
a Council-approved soil and water management plan.
Councils Environmental Engineering Unit are satisfied that the
proposed development will not lead to increase flooding downstream,
subject to the recommended permit conditions.
Potential impacts upon services will be assessed by Councils
Development Engineer, TasWater and TasNetworks.
High Voltage Transmission Lines
The site is close to a 110kV electricity transmission line, and part of
the development (car parking) would occur within transmission line
easements. The easements affect the lot known as 199 New Town
Road but do not affect the two lots known as 191 New Town Road.
All buildings and service station infrastructure would be sited on 191
New Town Road, New Town.
Principle 22 states the following:
Development shall be assessed as to whether any part of the
site is subject to the risk of safety hazard or constraints.
Conditions on a permit may impose requirements regarding
measures to be taken to ensure the risk of any hazard or
constraint is reduced to an acceptable level.
Potential hazards as a result of the proposed developments
proximity to the HVTLs include user/employee exposure to electromagnetic radiation and fire risk.
With regard to fire risk, TasNetworks have stated the following:
With respect to proposed activities adjacent to the
transmission easement (on CT 140542/2), TasNetworks
encourages the developer, through their due diligence
activities for this proposal, to take advice from experts when
satisfying itself that hazards associated with building a service
station in proximity to a transmission line are identified and
mitigated to an acceptable level. As a general principle, the
location of hazard areas at the furthest distance practicable
from the electricity transmission infrastructure is encouraged.

- 15 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
It is also expected that the issue would need to be addressed when

satisfying dangerous goods legal requirements.
With regard to health risk, the former Minister for Planning advised
Hobart City Council in 2011 as follows:
In response to your questions, I want to confirm that the
Government and Transend, the State-owned company
responsible for transmission lines, are aware of the issues and
research associated with high voltage' infrastructure as well as
concerns held in some sections of the community.
The Government considers that transmission line easements
in Tasmania adequately protect human health and safety in
accordance with World Health Authority guidelines as adopted
by the National Health and Medical Research Council of
Australia.
However, as the Director of Public Health, rather than the
TPC, advises Government on public health matters, I have
written to my colleague, the Minister for Health, seeking
clarification on whether there is any further evidence that
would justify this matter being referred to the Environment
Protection Authority or require a change in Government
planning policy.
Should the Director recommend a change of policy, I will
advise you and other relevant planning authorities in due
course.
No further advice has been received so the risk should be considered
acceptable.
7.1.2.
The Councils Development Engineer has assessed the development

in conjunction with the Councils road, traffic and stormwater
engineers, and also the Councils surveying services manager. In an
overall engineering sense, the proposal is endorsed with conditions.
With regard to the traffic concerns raised by the representors to the
proposal, the following comments have been provided by the
Councils Manager Traffic Engineering in response:
I have reviewed the plans and Traffic Impact Assessment Report (Pitt
& Sherry, February 2015) associated with the proposed Service
Station development at 191 New Town Road within the Maypole site.
I generally concur with the conclusions of the TIA Report.

- 16 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
A number of representations have been received in relation to the

traffic generated by the proposed new service station. The TIA
report has assessed the likely trip generation from the additional
development at the site and assessed the impacts of this on the
nearby road network, including the impacts at the Risdon Road / New
Town Road / Forster Street traffic signals. The TIA assessed the
performance of the intersection both now and into the future, both
with and without the additional development traffic. The proposed
development will not significantly increase delays or queue lengths at
this junction either now or in the next ten years. The level of
service of each road approach to the Risdon Road / New Town
Road / Forster Street traffic signals is unchanged as a result of the
additional traffic likely to be generated by the service station.
A number of representations raise concerns about the additional
driveways on New Town Road and the impacts of this on
pedestrians, cyclists and through traffic. The traffic modelling
suggests that there will be virtually no delays experienced by New
Town Road traffic at the accesses. There is currently a single
driveway on New Town Road that provides two-way accesses into
and out of the site. The TIA suggests limiting the New Town Road
accesses to left in at the northern access and left out at the southern
access. By separating the entry and exit movements and restricting
the right turn movements into and out of the site at New Town Road
is considered to improve the safety of this access. The sight
distance to both New Town Road traffic and to pedestrians has been
assessed as exceeding the required standards for a 50 km/h road.
Removal of the existing block work fences will assist with improving
sight distances particularly between drivers and pedestrians. The
TIA suggested that a solid median island would be required to
reinforce the turning restrictions however, a subsequent letter (from
pitt&sherry, dated 24 April 2015) states that a solid median is not
required on New Town Road to discourage right turns out of the New
Town Road access. The left turn out only arrangement at the access
can be sufficiently managed with signage and hatched line marking
at the New Town Road access approach.
It is also considered that the on-site layout of the service station will
assist in limiting the likelihood of vehicle queues extending beyond
the site boundary. There are 6 two-sided bowsers within the site, a
queuing area between the bowsers and the boundary and also a bypass route within the site.
Condition:
The New Town Road (northern) access driveway is to be limited to
left turn entry only. The New Town Road (southern) access driveway
is to be limited to left turn exit only. A plan showing appropriate
signage and linemarking will need to be provided to the satisfaction
of the Director City Infrastructure prior to the issue of a Certificate of
Occupancy for the service station building.

- 17 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
There is no change proposed to the current driveway access

arrangements on Risdon Road. The TIA Report assessed that there
would be negligible impacts at this location as a result of the additional
trips generated by the proposed service station.
The access driveway locations on New Town Road will impact on an
existing Metro Tasmania bus stop. The bus stop will need to be
relocated to accommodate the proposed development. As suggested
in the TIA, the bus stop locations along Elizabeth Street, New Town
Road and Main Road are being reviewed as part of the Main Road
Transit Corridor project. City of Hobart officers have been working with
officer of Metro Tasmania to determine a preferred location for a bus
stop near the Risdon Road / New Town Road / Forster Street traffic
signals. Although the location has not yet been finalised, the
southbound bus stop is likely to be located south of the Risdon Road
traffic signals (paired with the northbound bus stop new Woolworths).
It is considered appropriate to ask this developer to contribute towards
the cost of relocating the bus stop infrastructure including the bus
stop sign, seat and rubbish bin. Any new bus stops are required to
include tactile indicators on the footpath.
I know that I do not normally get involved with on-site matters,
however, the TIA refers to the inclusion of two parking spaces
designated as accessible spaces. These spaces do not appear to
be shown on the most recent plans and I believe it is important that a
condition is placed on the permit ensuring these spaces are provided.
Perhaps a final signage and linemarking plan to the satisfaction of the
Councils Senior Development Engineer.
It should be noted that I am aware of the assessment and conditions
that have been placed on the application by the Roads area. Please
feel free to contact me should you need to discuss.
7.2.
Additional notes:
7.2.1.
As an unlisted use, a minimum number of car parks is not defined

under Schedule E of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 the
number is as determined by Council. The proposal would rearrange
some existing onsite parking but result in the addition of eight extra
spaces overall (not including the space available within the bottle
shop lanes) which could be shared across all site uses. For the most
part customers using the service station would park adjacent to the
fuel bowsers under the station canopy. The 12 spaces nearby would
provide additional parking but would be unlikely to be fully occupied
by users of the service station. Overall the partial rearrangement and
formalisation of the parking layout across the site is considered to
provide an appropriate regime for onsite parking.

- 18 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
7.2.2.
The front setback of the proposed service station is consistent with

the requirements of the commercial and residential zone and
principle 16 where with no specific front setback defined,
development is therefore not permitted to obtain a lesser setback
from the street alignment than that prevailing in the vicinity, or such a
dimension as the Council may determine having regard to the
desired future character of its Precinct. The development exhibits a
greater setback from the street alignment and the statement of
desired future character for the precinct does not refer to front
setbacks.
7.2.3.
The proposed 24 hour a day operation of the proposed service

station is considered to be acceptable given the location of the site
and surrounding uses. With few immediately adjacent residential
developments immediate impacts from the service station as a
whole, but particularly regarding the hours of operation are unlikely to
be unreasonable. During early hours, customer numbers will
generally be reduced, and as such the benefits of having the site
activated at all hours as opposed to being a dark and unsociable
space when the current site uses are closed would outweigh any
potential noise or lighting impacts. This would allow some
consistency with Principle 24 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982 regarding crime prevention. It should be noted that no external
lighting on poles or otherwise is proposed as part of this application
and as such the lighting of the service station from within its own
structure, with the station facing away from the one adjoining
residential development and addressing New Town Road, would not
be detrimental. Residential amenity would not be unreasonably
diminished.
7.2.4.
It is considered warranted that some increased landscaping within

existing kerbed beds inside property boundaries should be
incorporated into the development to provide screening and softening
of the development site. The landscaping plan submitted with the
application focuses on the immediate surrounds and frontage of the
service station. This plan must be extended to addresses
landscaping within the abovementioned spaces.
7.2.5.
There is some ambiguity between the submitted plans and the

supporting documentation with regard to the LPG tank proposed at
the front of the service station, and whether or not this tank is
underground like the envirotanks or above ground. The impact of an
above ground LPG tank has been raised in some of the
representations received. This matter has been queried with the
applicants consultant, who has responded with confirmation that the
tank would definitely be underground. If approval is forthcoming a
condition to ensure that all tanks are installed underground should be
included on any permit issued.

- 19 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
7.2.6.
8.
Although raised as a concern of one of the representors, no works

within New Town Road are proposed in the application. The initial
supporting report and traffic impact assessment referred to a median
strip within the road to prevent right-hand turns out of the site on New
Town Road. When queried in a request for additional information,
the applicants consultant confirmed with support from their traffic
engineer that no such works were proposed nor were they seen as
necessary, and traffic could be adequately controlled with directional
signage within the site. Such signage would not normally require a
planning permit.
Conclusion
8.1.
9.
20/7/2015
The proposed new building for unlisted use (service station), alterations to
hotel carparking and consolidation of titles at 191 and 199 New Town Road
satisfies the relevant provisions of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982,
and as such is recommended for approval.
Recommendations
That: A. Pursuant to the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the Council
approve the application for a new building for unlisted use (service
station), alterations to hotel carparking and consolidation of titles at 191
and 199 New Town Road, New Town for the reasons outlined in the
officers report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:
1.

2.

Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2015/00290-HCC, dated 12 March
2015, as attached to the permit.
3.
The use and development must comply with the requirements of the
Tasmanian Heritage Council as detailed in the Notice of Heritage
Decision, Works Application No. 4687 dated 17 June 2015, as
attached to the permit.

- 20 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
4.
20/7/2015
Prior the issue of any building consent under the Building Act 2000,
an extended and comprehensive landscaping plan for the overall site
must be submitted, which must include the provision of:
(i) visual separation and a landscaped buffer of trees and medium
sized shrubs with additional low scale planting between the new
development and the rear of the Maypole Hotel; and
(ii) additional screen planting within existing boundary line garden
beds in the north-eastern rear corner and along the eastern
boundary of the property.
The plan must indicate the species of trees and shrubs proposed and
must be submitted for approval by the Councils Director City
Planning. When approved, the landscaping plan will form part of this
permit and must be implemented prior to the first use of the service
station and maintained to the satisfaction of the Council.
To ensure that setting of the Maypole Hotel is conserved and
impacts of the new development on the heritage values of the
place are mitigated.
5.
All fuel/gas storage tanks associated with the service station must be
installed underground as indicated on the proposed site plan HAZ1907-A01 3 submitted to the Council on 27 April 2015.
To clarify the scope of the permit and to address ambiguity
between the submitted plans and written documentation.
6.
Construct all driveways, drainage, services and accesses to/at the

site in accordance with the approved drawings and specifications and
Municipal Standard Drawings and Specifications.
To ensure that all works are carried out to the Councils
standards.

- 21 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
7.
20/7/2015
The design and construction of the access, parking and turning areas
must comply with the Australian Standard, AS 2890.22002:
Parking facilities: Part 2: Off-street commercial vehicle facilities, to
the satisfaction of the Councils Director City Planning. A suitably
qualified person must certify that fuel tanker trucks and other heavy
vehicles can safely enter and exit the site, and manoeuvre within the
site as required. Design drawings of these areas showing details as
necessary and demonstrating compliance with the above
requirements must be submitted to the Council for approval prior to
the issuing of a building permit/consent under the Building Act 2000
or the commencement of any construction
To ensure that the access and parking layout for the
development is to accepted standards.
8. The New Town Road (northern) access driveway is to be limited to

left turn entry only. The New Town Road (southern) access driveway
is to be limited to left turn exit only. A plan showing appropriate
signage and linemarking must be submitted to the Council for
approval (to the satisfaction of the Director City Infrastructure) prior to
the issuing of a building permit/consent under the Building Act 2000
or the commencement of any construction.
To ensure that the access layout for the development is to
accepted standards.
9.
Barriers compliant with the Australian Standard AS 1170.1 must be

installed to prevent vehicles running off the edge of a carriageway,
raised platform or deck where the drop from the edge of the
trafficable area to a lower level is 600mm or greater, and wheel stops
shall be installed for drops between 150mm and 600mm.
Where barriers are required as above, prior to the issuing of a
building permit/consent under the Building Act 2000 submit a
structural detail and certificate issued by a suitably qualified engineer
demonstrating compliance with the above requirements. A suitably
qualified engineer must also inspect the construction of any vehicle
safety barriers and prior to occupancy submit a certificate to the
Council, certifying compliance with this requirement.

- 22 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Advice:
If vehicle safety barriers will not be required because the drops will
be less than 600mm, the designers should make this clear on the
drawings to help avoid unnecessary delays in building approval.
Sensible landscaping can help reduce any drops.
Handrails or safety barriers complying with the BCA may be required
in some cases to prevent injury to pedestrians.
To ensure that the works will comply with the Councils
standard requirements
10. The proposed site must be provided with adequate stormwater
service connections to the Council mains/systems (at the developers
cost and in accordance with the Municipal Standard Drawings and
the relevant standards) to the satisfaction of the Council. Extension
of Council mains may be required. The developer is responsible for
the design of these service connections and for the design of any
mains extensions. Existing service connections may be reused if
they are of the appropriate size and are in good condition. Any
proposed building envelopes must be shown clear of all easements.
A detailed services plan showing both existing and proposed
services and access to all lots on the site must be prepared by a
qualified and experienced designer and submitted to and approved
by the Council prior to the commencement of work on site. The plan
must clearly distinguish between private and public infrastructure.
Any proposed stormwater mains will require detailed engineering
drawings including a longitudinal section. Note that engineering
drawings for any proposed public infrastructure will need to be
checked and certified by a qualified and experienced civil engineer.
Advice: Note that the lots will also require adequate water and sewer
service connections to Southern Water mains/systems. The services
plan must clearly show the existing/ proposed water, sewer and
stormwater service connections for each lot.
To ensure that all works are carried out to the Councils
standards.
11. Prior to the issue of a certificate of occupancy/completion, all
stormwater from the proposed development (including hardstand
runoff and any rainwater tank overflows) must be discharged to the
Councils infrastructure at the owners cost.

- 23 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Prior to the issue of any building consent (including demolition)

commencement of works (whichever occurs first), design drawings of
the proposed stormwater drainage and connection to the Councils
infrastructure, prepared by a suitably qualified person must be
Infrastructure and the Councils Director City Planning.
Design drawings must include appropriate long sections, levels and
gradients to the point of discharge, as required. Once approved, the
design drawings will form part of this permit and must be complied
with.
Advice:
In accordance with the Tasmanian Plumbing Regulations 2004 you
are required to drain driveways, parking areas and other paved areas
to an approved stormwater disposal system to prevent nuisance
problems with neighbours, or with the public where water flows onto
footpaths. This will require the installation of suitable grated
trenches/spoon drains /grated pits, etc to collect the runoff from
paved areas within the property boundaries and an outlet connection
to the kerb and gutter or to the Council stormwater mains system. A
kerbline on the low side of the paved area may be required to direct
the stormwater to a pit. The paved area should have a suitable
crossfall to the kerbline (a minimum of 3% is often used). Such
drainage must be to the satisfaction of the Councils Plumbing
Compliance Officer.
12. Any construction of public infrastructure (which will be taken over by
the Council) must be carried out either by the Council or by a
Council-approved private contractor in strict accordance with the
conditions set out in the document Guidelines for Public
Infrastructure Construction by the Private Sector, with a
maintenance period of 12 months. A copy of this document is
appended to the planning approval. Note that live works such as
connections to existing SW mains or abandonment of existing
connections are to be carried out by the Council at the developers
cost.
To ensure that public works are carried out to the required
standards.

- 24 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
13. Prior to the issuing of a building permit and/or Council-approved

engineering drawings, any private contractors who wish to build
public infrastructure that is part of this development must first obtain
a permit to construct public infrastructure from the Council's Project
and Development Inspector on telephone (03) 62 382 967.
Advice: Interested contractors must read the document "Guidelines
for Public Infrastructure Construction by the Private Sector" (copy
available from Council) and fill in an application form. Contact the
Project and Development Inspector for more information.
standards.
14. Where all approved works have been completed and prior to the
sealing of the final survey plan, the developer must lodge with the
Council security in the form of a cash deposit or bank guarantee from
an approved financial institution, equal to 5% of the contract value of
the works (for SW mains and any public infrastructure). This bond
will be released after 12 months, should no maintenance works on
public infrastructure be required. This will be demonstrated by a final
inspection by the Council, and submission of a recorded CCTV
inspection and associated report of any new public stormwater
infrastructure, taken no more than one month before the end of the
maintenance period. Where remedial works are to be undertaken,
the bond will not be released until the works are completed to the
satisfaction of the Director City Infrastructure.
Advice: Upon the expiry of the maintenance period and submission
of the CCTV, please contact the Councils Project and Development
Inspector on telephone 6238 2967 to arrange an inspection prior to
the release of the security bond.
standards.
15. Engineering drawings in both plan view and long-section of the
proposed stormwater main extension, as well as the associated
calculations and catchment area plans, must be submitted to and
approved by the Councils Director City Infrastructure prior to issue of
a building permit. These should include, but not be limited to flows,
velocities, clearances, cover, grade, sizing, material, connections,
erosion protection, adequate working platforms around manholes,
easements and inspection openings.
To ensure Councils hydraulic infrastructure meets acceptable
standards.

- 25 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
16. Stormwater pre- treatment for stormwater discharges from the

development/ new car-parking/ hardstand area must be installed
prior to the issue of a certificate of completion. Prior to issue of a
plumbing permit, details of the proposed treatment, including
estimations of contaminant removal and a maintenance plan must be
submitted to and approved by Councils Director City Infrastructure.
Clearly state all assumptions.
Advice: Hobart City Council's Water Sensitive Urban Design Site
Development Guidelines and Practice Notes are available from
Councils website. For further detail, Council refers the applicant to
Water Sensitive Urban Design: Engineering Procedures for
Stormwater Management in Tasmania, available from
www.derwentestuary.org.au
Please note that the State Stormwater Strategy current best practice
for stormwater treatment includes an 80% removal of total
suspended solids, a 45% removal of total nitrogen, and a 45%
removal of total phosphorous, and maintenance of the 3mth ARI
flows. Treatment for carparks should target hydrocarbons and fine
sediments.
The Stormwater maintenance plan must outline the operational and
maintenance measures to check and ensure the ongoing effective
operation of all systems, ie. Including but not limited to: inspection
frequency; cleanout procedures; as installed design detail/diagrams;
a description and sketch of how the installed system operates; details
of life of asset and replacement requirement; Estimation of the life
cycle cost that includes maintenance cost.
Council recommends submission of a MUSIC model or similar, with
any alterations from the default values explained.
To avoid the possible pollution of drainage systems and natural
watercourses, and o comply with relevant State Legislation.

- 26 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
17.
20/7/2015
Prior to the issuing of a building permit/consent under the Building

site (whichever occurs first), submit to and have approved by the
Councils Director City Planning a soil and water management plan
detailing proposed sediment and erosion control measures. The
approved control measures must be installed prior to any disturbance
of soil or vegetation, or construction activity such as concrete cutting,
demolition, etc and must be regularly inspected and maintained
during the construction/ demolition period to prevent soil and other
materials entering the local stormwater system, roadways or
adjoining properties. The control measures must remain in place until
such time as all construction activity likely to generate sediment has
been completed or all disturbed areas have been stabilised using
vegetation and/or restored or sealed to the satisfaction of the
Council. The approved soil and water management plan forms part of
this permit and must be complied with.
Advice:
To protect any onsite or nearby stormwater drainage pits, temporary
sediment traps should be installed around them. For further
guidance on preparing soil and water management control
measures, please refer to the pro-forma and Soil and Water Fact
Sheet No.3- Management Plans provided in the Planning Permit
Package or alternatively the Department of Environment, Parks,
Heritage and the Arts has published Soil and Water Management
Factsheets (2008). These are available from Council or online at
www.derwentestuary.org.au
legislation.
18.
Two titles within the development site (CT158085/1 and CT140542/2)

must be adhered in accordance with the provisions of Section 110 of
the Local Government Building & Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1993
to the satisfaction of the Councils Director City Planning and the
Councils Manager Surveying Services prior to the issue of building
certificates.
Advice: The application for an Adhesion Order to the Council has a
fee of $220. Evidence will be required that the owners and
mortgagees do not object to the adhesion and the condition is
considered completed when a copy of the engrossed receipt of the
Land Titles Office lodgment slip for the Adhesion Order has been
received by the Council.
To ensure compliance with statutory provisions.

- 27 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
19.
20/7/2015
The developer must pay the cost of any alterations and/or

reinstatement to the Councils infrastructure, including the sites
service connection points, incurred as a result of the proposed
development works.
To ensure that any Council infrastructure affected by the
proposal is reinstated at the developers full cost.
20.
Prior to the issuing of any building permit/consent under the Building

Act 2000 (including demolition) or the commencement of work on
site, the developer shall lodge with the Council an Infrastructure
Protection Bond in the form of a cash/cheque deposit or a bank
guarantee from an approved financial institution, for an amount of
$4,000, as security for the protection from damage of the Council's
infrastructure during the construction of the development. The bond
will be released once the works are completed should no damage
have occurred.
Advice: Once the certificate of occupancy/completion for the
development has been issued and/or the works are completed,
please contact the Council's Project and Development Inspector on
telephone (03) 62 382 967 to arrange an inspection prior to the
release of the Councils Infrastructure Protection Bond.
To ensure the protection of the Council's infrastructure.
21.
Prior to the issuing of any building permit/consent under the Building

site (whichever occurs first), the developer must lodge with the
Council a comprehensive photographic record of the condition of
Councils infrastructure (road surface, services, footpaths, kerb and
gutter, driveway crossovers and nature strips) at the road frontage to
the site and adjacent to the site.
Any damage to Councils infrastructure during construction must be
repaired within 30 days to the satisfaction of Councils Director City
Infrastructure at the developers cost.
The photographic record will be relied upon to establish the extent of
any damage caused to Council infrastructure during construction. In
the event that the developer fails to provide a pre-construction
photographic record of the site then any damage to Council
responsibility of the developer and must be repaired within 30 days to
the satisfaction of Councils Director City Infrastructure at the
developers cost.

- 28 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Advice:
The developer should take particular care to photograph any preexisting damage or defects to Council infrastructure at the road
frontage and adjacent to the site.
Any damage to Councils infrastructure during construction must be
reported to the Councils Project and Development Inspector, on
telephone (03) 62 382 967 within 5 working days.
and/or reinstated at the developers full cost.
22.
Detailed design drawings of the proposed vehicle entrances over the

highway reservation in general accordance with the Tasmanian
Standard Drawings (IPWEA) TSD R09.v1 Urban Roads Driveways,
TSD-R16-v1, Concrete Kerbs and Channels, Reinforced Heavy
Vehicular Crossings, by a suitably qualified and experienced
engineer to the satisfaction of the Councils Director City
Infrastructure, must be submitted prior to the issue of a building
permit.
Advice: Drawings must show location of existing Tasnetwork
easement vehicle crossing and the location of the road light pole
near the proposed northern access off New Town Road. A 2m
clearance between the light pole and the vehicle entrance is
preferred, any requirement to relocate the road light pole will be at
the developers cost. The drawings shall include a long section
through each proposed driveway from the road pavement seal to the
end of each ramp within the property boundary. The drawings shall
show the location of the metro bus stop.
To ensure that all works are carried out to Councils standards.
23.
Reinstate any redundant vehicle crossover to footpath, kerb and gutter

in accordance with Tasmanian Standard Drawings(IPWEA) TSDR14-v1 and TSD-R15-v1 Type KC ( Kerb and Channel ) and
(concrete or asphalt) Urban Roads Footpaths TSD-R11-v1, prior to
the issue of a completion/occupancy certificate.
Advice: Reinstatement is required in accordance with Hobart City
Councils Highway By-Law 3 of 2008.
To ensure that all works are carried out to Councils standards

- 29 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
24.
20/7/2015
Any works, in particular any earth-retaining structures, within or which

supports the New Town Road highway reservation, must not
undermine the stability of the highway reservation. A structural design
and certificate signed by a suitably qualified and experienced
engineer certifying the above requirement to the approval of the
Councils Director Infrastructure Services must be submitted prior to
the issue of a building permit.
Advice: The Earth retaining structures must be designed in
accordance with the requirements of AS 4678, with a design life in
accordance with table 3.1, typical application major public work, and
must take account of the additional surcharge loading as required by
relevant Australian Standard. The structural certificate must be noted
accordingly.
To ensure that the structural integrity of the Councils highway
reservation is not compromised by the development.
25.
The owner must indemnify the Council, to the satisfaction of the

Councils General Manager and enter into an agreement in
accordance with Part 5 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act
1993, with the Council, against any costs or claims arising from the
proposed excavation and construction adjacent to the New Town
Road highway reservation. The owner must comply with the Part 5
agreement, and submit a signed agreement to the Council prior to
the issue of a building permit. All costs pursuant to preparation and
registration of the Agreement must be borne by the owner(s).
Advice: The Councils solicitors will prepare the Part 5 Agreement(s)
for signing by the property owners, and once signed by all parties,
will lodge the agreement with the Lands Titles Office to be placed on
the property title. The cost of preparing the Part 5 Agreement and
registration with the Recorder of Titles must be met by the developer,
and a separate invoice will be forwarded.
To ensure that structural support to the highway reservation is
maintained.
B.
The Council include the following advice to the applicant:

1.


- 30 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
2.

with the Building Act 2000 and Tasmanian Plumbing Regulations
2014, and a permit issued prior to the commencement of any
plumbing work on site.
3.
Underground Petroleum Storage Systems (UPSS):

(i) Please note that the Environmental Management and Pollution
Control (Underground Petroleum Storage Systems)
Regulations 2010 apply to the design, construction,
maintenance, monitoring and decommissioning of underground
petroleum storage systems. For information about the
requirements of these Regulations, please refer to the following
EPA web page: www.epa.tas.gov.au
(ii) Section 32 of the Environmental Management and Pollution
Control Act 1994 requires persons responsible for an activity
whereby a pollutant is released into the environment that
causes, or may cause:
a. an environmental nuisance to notify the relevant Council;
and
b. environmental harm to notify the Director of the
Environment Protection Authority;
as soon as reasonably practicable, but not later than 24 hours
after becoming aware of the release. Further information in
relation to petroleum pollutant releases is provided in the
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and
Environment information bulletin 101 Notification Obligations
for Site Contamination Due to Petroleum Hydrocarbons
(August 2006).
(iii) Section 74B of the Environmental Management and Pollution
Control Act 1994 requires the owner or occupier of land known
or believed (or under the circumstances should reasonably be
believed) to be a contaminated site:
a. not to commence or continue any activity that may directly
or indirectly further cause or continue the exposure, escape
or emission of the relevant pollutant; and
b. to notify the Director of the Environment Protection
Authority of the details of the known or suspected
contamination within 24 hours after becoming aware of the
situation.
4.
Environmental Nuisance:
(i) Noise, dust, fumes, odour or other pollutants emitted must not
cause disturbance or annoyance to owners/occupiers in the
vicinity during construction and ongoing operation and shall

- 31 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
comply with the Environmental Management and Pollution

Control Act 1994.
5.
Food Act 2003:

(i) If the service station will sell food, detailed plans must be
submitted to Councils Environmental Health Unit for
assessment as required by Regulation 16 of the Building
Regulations 2004. (Your building surveyor will initiate this
process with Council). The fit-out must comply with the
requirements of the National Construction Code (NCC) of the
Building Code of Australia (BCA) Tas Part H02 Food
Premises. This will also include complying with various
Australian Standards. Please be aware that all food
businesses must also comply with the Australia New Zealand
Food Standards Code and Food Act 2003.
(ii) You should contact TasWater to discuss trade waste
agreements.
6.
Prior to the commencement of any work within the road reservation

(such as new vehicle crossovers) by a private contractor, the owner
must obtain a Road Opening Permit, otherwise known as a Permit to
Temporarily Open Up and Occupy a Highway (pursuant to Section
46 of the Local Government (Highways) Act 1982) for any privately
undertaken works in the highway reservation. This permit will include
items such as hours of work, road safety, reinstatement, etc. Note
that an application form and advice regarding the permit
requirements can be found on Councils website
www.hobartcity.com.au
7.
Once a permit has been issued the developer must contact the
Project and Development Inspector on telephone (03) 6238 2967 at
least 48 hours notice prior to the commencement of any works.
Please note completed applications for the permit must be
accompanied by a Safe Work Method Statement. Any queries should
be directed to the Traffic Engineering Unit on telephone 62 382 791.
8.
Please note that the agreement of the Councils Director

Infrastructure Services is required to adjust footpath levels to suit the
design of any proposed floor levels or entrances to the development
prior to the issue of any building permit.
9.
The footpath material must match existing footpath, with the

exception of the vehicle aprons.
10.
The footpaths in the vicinity of the development will need to be

reinstated to their original (pre-development) condition. If this is not
feasible, new footpaths will need to be installed at the developers
cost to the satisfaction of the Councils Director City Infrastructure.
11.
Tasmanian Standard Drawings can be accessed on the Local

Government Association Tasmania website www.lgat.tas.gov.au

- 32 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
12.
20/7/2015
Prior to any works commencing within the highway reservation a

license pursuant to the Council's by-laws must be obtained for the
use of the public footpath or road pavement for, hoarding,
scaffolding, a scissor lift, crane, skip bin or any other equipment in
accordance with conditions to be established by the Council. Prior to
contacting Council please refer to the advice on Councils web page
Work in the Road Reservation www.hobartcity.com.au . To apply
for the relevant permit please submit completed application forms to
traffic@hobartcity.com.au or mail to the Manager Traffic Engineering
Hobart City Council GPO Box 503 Hobart 7001. Any queries should
be directed to the Traffic Engineering Unit on 62 382 791 . All
applications for permits and licences must be accompanied by a Safe
Work Method Statement.
(Cameron Sherriff)
Leanne Lassig
Date of Report:
Attachment C Tasmanian Heritage Councils Notice of Heritage
Decision, Works Application No. 4687
Attachment D Supporting Report
Attachment E Traffic Impact Assessment
Attachment F Plans
Attachment G Stormwater Plan
Supporting Document(s)
Attachment 1 Correspondence re: Additional Information

Attachment 2 Correspondence and Information from
TasNetworks
Attachment 3 Email regarding Stormwater and Adhesion of
Titles

- 33 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

191 & 199 New Town Road, New Town
Description
Drawing
Application Form
Title
Supporting Report
Traffic Impact Assessment
Correspondence re: Additional
Information
Correspondence and
Information from TasNetworks
Email regarding Stormwater
and Adhesion of Titles
Drawing List
Proposed Site Plan
Tanker Path Layout
Concept Elevations
Landscape Plan
Existing and Proposed Access

Site Plan
Stormwater Plan Sketch
Date of Lodgement
to Council
27 February 2015
CT 37218/1
CT 140542/2
CT 158085/1
Author: Pitt & Sherry
20 February 2015
20 February 2015
20 February 2015
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
12 May 2015
Project No: HAZ-1907

Drawing No: HAZ-1907
Drawn by: HAZKEM
Drawing No: HAZ-1907-A01
Revision No: 3
Drawn by: HAZKEM
Date of Drawing: 16.02.2015
Revision No: 3
Drawn by: HAZKEM
Revision No: 0
Drawn by: HAZKEM
Drawing No: HAZ-1907-L01
Revision No: 0
Drawn by: HAZKEM
Drawing No: HB14573R3
Revision No: A
Drawn by: Pitt & Sherry
Date of Drawing: 16/03/2015
Drawing No: HB14573-P5
12 May 2015
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
- 34 -
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
27 April 2015
CPC Agenda
Drawing
20/7/2015
Drawn by: Pitt & Sherry


- 35 -
File Ref: 5516065 P/199/712
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066

Council
Planning Permit 15-00181
No.
TasWater details
TasWater
TWDA 2015/00290-HCC
Reference No.
Council notice
26/02/2015
date
TasWater Phil Papps

Contact Greg Cooper (Trade Waste)
Phone No.
(03) 6237 8246

(03) 6237 8280
Response issued to
Development details
Address 191 NEW TOWN RD, NEW TOWN
Property ID (PID)
2266734
Description of
Service Station
development
Prepared by
Hazkem
Site Plan / HAZ-1907-A01
Revision No.
Date of Issue
16/02/2015
Conditions
Pursuant to the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 (TAS) Section 56P(1) TasWater imposes the following
conditions on the permit for this application:
CONNECTIONS, METERING & BACKFLOW
1.
A suitably sized water supply with metered connections / sewerage system and connections to the
development must be designed and constructed to TasWaters standards.
2.
A high hazard backflow containment device (RPZD) must be provided on the water service connection at the
property boundary and the property owner must be responsible for the ownership, operation, maintenance,
inspection and testing of the devices in accordance with AS3500.1 and AS2845.3 and TasWaters Boundary
Backflow Containment Selection Guideline.
3.
The water property connection must be an above ground high hazard type and must be located outside of
trafficable areas.
4.
Proposed retaining walls must be no closer than 1.0m from the sewer property connection inspection opening.
5.
REDUNDANT TASWATER INFRASTRUCTURE

6.
The developer must arrange to have the 150mm diameter sewer main (TasWater asset: SPZ1SEG53244)
located within 199 New Town Rd (CT 158085/1) CCTV inspected to confirm it does not service any upstream
properties. If this is verified the sewer main must be disconnected and capped and the redundant sewer either
removed or filled with flowable grout.
TRADE WASTE
7.
Prior to the commencement of operation the developer/property owner must obtain Consent to discharge Trade
Waste from TasWater.
8.
The developer must install appropriately sized and suitable pre-treatment devices prior to gaining Consent to
discharge.
9.
The Developer/property owner must comply with all TasWater conditions prescribed in the Trade Waste
Page 1 of 3
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066
Consent.
HEADWORKS
10.
landowner as the case may be, must pay a headworks charge totalling $438.40 to TasWater for water
the date of this Submission to Planning Authority Notice until the date it is paid to TasWater
11.
landowner as the case may be, must pay a headworks charge totalling $1,532.80 to TasWater for sewerage
the date of this Submission to Planning Authority Notice until the date it is paid to TasWater.
Advice: If the the Final Plan of Survey has been lodged with Council and a Certificate of Practical Completion
is issued in the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2016, then the above headworks amount(s) will be waived in
line with the prevailing State Government Policy. Please visit www.development.tas.gov.au for further
information.

12.
The applicant or landowner as the case may be, must pay a development assessment fee to TasWater for this
proposal of $364.75 for development assessment as approved by the Economic Regulator and the fees will be
indexed as approved by the Economic Regulator from the date of the Submission to Planning Authority Notice
for the development assessment fee until the date they are paid to TasWater. Payment is required within 30
days from the date of the invoice.
Advice
TRADE WASTE
A. Prior to any Building and/or Plumbing work being undertaken, the applicant will need to make an application to
TasWater for a Certificate of Certifiable Work (Building and/or Plumbing). The Certificate of Certifiable Work
(Building and/or Plumbing) must accompany all documentation submitted to Council. Documentation must
include a floor and site plan with:
Location of all pre-treatment devices i.e. Oil Water Separator;
Schematic drawings and specification (including the size and type) of any proposed pre-treatment device and
drainage design; and
Location of an accessible sampling point in accordance with the TasWater Trade Waste Flow Meter and
Sampling Specifications for sampling discharge.
B. At the time of submitting the Certificate of Certifiable Work (Building and/or Plumbing) a Trade Waste Application
together with the Motor Trades Supplement form is also required.
C. If the nature of the business changes or the business is sold, TasWater is required to be informed in order to
review the pre-treatment assessment.
The application forms are available at http://www.taswater.com.au/Customers/Liquid-Trade-Waste/Commercial.
Further information regarding Trade Waste can be found at www.taswater.com.au
GENERAL
For detailed information on how headworks have been calculated for this development please contact the TasWater
contact as listed above.
infrastructure.
Page 2 of 3
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066
Declaration
The drawings/documents and conditions stated above constitute TasWaters Submission to Planning Authority
Notice.
Authorised by
Jason Taylor
Page 3 of 3
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Tasmanian Heritage Council

GPO Box 618 Hobart Tasmania 7000
103 Macquarie St, Hobart Tasmania 7000
Tel: 1300 850 332
Fax: [03] 6233 3186
enquiries@heritage.tas.gov.au
www.heritage.tas.gov.au
PLANNING REF:
THC WORKS REF:
REGISTERED PLACE NO:
FILE NO:
APPLICANT:
DATE:
PLN-15-00181-01
4687
2686
07-86-85THC
Konstantinos Mantzis
17 June 2015
NOTICE OF HERITAGE DECISION

(Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995)
The Place:
Proposed Works:
Maypole Hotel, 191 New Town Road, New Town.

Construction of a new service station, landscaping work and signage.
Consolidation of titles.
Under section 39(6)(b) of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995, the Heritage Council
gives notice that it consents to the discretionary permit being granted in accordance
with the documentation submitted with discretionary permit application PLN-1500181-01 received by the Tasmanian Heritage Council on 27/02/2015 and the
additional information received on 27/04/2015 and 12/05/2015 subject to the
following condition:
1. A landscaping plan, which will provide visual separation and a
landscaped buffer between the new building development and the
rear of the Maypole Hotel, must submitted to and signed off by
Heritage Tasmanias Works Manager prior to the commencement of
any works. The landscaping plan must include the provision of trees
and medium sized shrubs, along with low scale planting.
To ensure that setting of the Maypole Hotel is conserved and impacts of the new
development on the heritage values of the place are mitigated.
Please ensure the details of this notice, including condition, are included in any permit
issued, and forward a copy of the permit or decision of refusal to the Heritage Council
for our records.
Please contact Deirdre Macdonald on 6165 3712 if you require clarification of any
matters contained in this notice.
Ian Boersma
Works Manager Heritage Tasmania
Under delegation of the Tasmanian Heritage Council
CPC Agenda
17 June 2015
20/7/2015

GPO Box 618 Hobart Tasmania 7000
103 Macquarie St, Hobart Tasmania 7000
Tel: 1300 850 332
Fax: [03] 6233 3186
enquiries@heritage.tas.gov.au
www.heritage.tas.gov.au
Mr Nick Heath
General Manager
Hobart City Council
GPO Box 503
Hobart TAS 7001
THR ID: #2686
FILE: 07-86-85THC
Dear Mr Heath
NOTICE OF HERITAGE DECISION
You will find enclosed a NOTICE OF HERITAGE DECISION for the discretionary permit
application that you recently forwarded to us.
The Historic Cultural Heritage Act 1995 requires the Planning Authority to notify the Heritage
Council of its determination and provide the Heritage Council with a copy of the discretionary
permit.
If a discretionary permit is granted it must be subject to (at least) any conditions required by
the Heritage Council in accordance with the Act. The Planning Authority must refuse to grant a
discretionary permit if so notified by the Heritage Council.
Should you require any advice on the handling of this application, please contact the
undersigned on 6777 2073. I will be happy to assist.
Yours sincerely
Ian Boersma
Works Manager Heritage Tasmania
Under delegation of the Tasmanian Heritage Council
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
received on the 20 February 2015.
20/7/2015
Maypole Service Station

Development Application
transport | community | industrial & mining | carbon & energy
Prepared for:
Kon Matzis
Date:
20 February 2015
Rev 00
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant to the
application
for a planning
Table
of Contents
1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1
2.
SiteHobart
Analysis
...........................................................................................................................................
1
Planning Authority:
City
Council
3.
4.
5.
The Applicant ........................................................................................................................................ 2

Proposal................................................................................................................................................. 2
City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982................................................................................................... 3
5.1
Zoning ............................................................................................................................................. 3
5.2
6.
7.
8.
Schedules ........................................................................................................................................ 5
State Policies ......................................................................................................................................... 9
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 10
References........................................................................................................................................... 11
List of figures
Figure 1: Location of subject site. Source: The List (www.thelist.tas.gov.au) .............................................. 1
Figure 2: Site Zoning. Source Hobart City Council
(http://www.hobartcity.com.au/Development/Planning/Planning_Schemes/City_of_Hobart_Planning_Sc
heme_1982) ................................................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 3. Maypole Hotel, Circa 1888 (State Library of Tasmania ADRI: AUTAS001126183722) .................... 8
Appendix A
Appendix B
Copy of Titles
Full Set of Plans
Prepared by:
.
Kate Jones
Date:
20 February 2015
Reviewed by:
.
Dion Lester
Date:
20 February 2015
Authorised by:
.
Dion Lester
Date:
20 February 2015
pitt&sherry ref: HB14573H001 DA 33P Rev 00/KJ/bb
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Report Revision History

Rev
Description
No.
Prepared by
Reviewed by
Authorised by
Date
2015 pitt&sherry
This document is and shall remain the property of pitt&sherry. The document may only be used for the purposes for
which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use
of this document in any form is prohibited.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant to
for a planning
1.the application
Introduction
received This
on the
20 February
document
has 2015.
been prepared for the purpose of supporting a development application for a new
service station and car park at 191 and 199 New Town Road, New Town.
There is an existing building, being the Maypole Hotel, located at 191 New Town Road, of which the
proposed development will adjoin. The Maypole Hotel is heritage listed and sufficient setbacks have been
provided within the development design to ensure that it will not detract from the cultural value of the
existing building.
2.
Site Analysis
The subject sites have frontage to New Town Road and Risdon Road, as shown in Figure 1 below. The
area is a mix of residential and commercial uses.
Figure 1: Location of subject site. Source: The List (www.thelist.tas.gov.au)
There is an existing building located on the corner title, being the Maypole Hotel at 191 New Town Road.
The title at 199 New Town Road is currently vacant.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
relevant to Titles
the application for a planning
Certificates of Title
Property Owner
Planning Authority:
Hobart City Council
CT 37218/1
CT140542/2
CT158085/1
20/7/2015
Address
Mantzis Holdings Pty Ltd
'Maypole Tavern' - 191 New Town Road
Ennio Aldo Didomenico1
199 New Town Road
Copies of these titles can be found at Appendix A. There is a transmission easement that runs parallel to
the site on 199 New Town Road.
CT 158085/1 has a burdening transmission line easement over the title. Initial consultation with
TasNetworks has indicated they have no concerns with the site being used for car parking.
3.
The Applicant
The Applicant for this Permit is Findella Pty Ltd / Mantzis Holdings Pty Ltd (contact Kon Mantzis). The
applicant is the owner of 191 New Town Road and has recently purchased 199 New Town Road. The
applicant has notified the now previous owner (but as currently listed on the title) of 199 New Town Road
of the intention to make the application pursuant to section 52 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals
Act 1993.
Contact:
For the purpose of any clarification of further information, please contact:
Dion Lester
pitt&sherry
Principal Planner
Phone: (03) 6210 1473
Mobile: 0400 224 414
Email: planning@pittsh.com.au
4.
Proposal
The proposed development application is for a new service station and car park at 191 and 199 New
Town Road, New Town. The development will include:
A total site area (including car parking on adjacent title) of 1761 m2 across the two title of 191 and
199 New Town Road;
6 petrol bowsers;
Underground fuel tanks (fibreglass);
Above ground LPG tank at a height of approx. 5m;
A shop to facilitate petrol sales inc. toilets (approx. 40m2);
A permanent canopy at a height of 4.8m;
Additional car parking spaces and new kerbing;
This title has recently been purchased by the applicant (Mantzis Holdings Pty Ltd), however transfer of title details had not been
completed at the time of writing.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
extension
ofplanning
a existing retaining wall between the service station site proper and the existing
relevant totheThe
application
for a
Maypole Hotel and
parking
wasarea (east west direction); and
A new retaining wall between the rear of the proposed service station shop and the Maypole Hotel
parking
area.City Council
Planning Authority:
Hobart
The shop area will include two toilets and two sinks. The underground fuel tanks will include single and
split compartment type 55KL U/G envirotanks and a 17KL U/G LPG tank. The installation of the
underground petrol tanks will require further approval from the Work Standards Tasmania, which will be
sought following the development application approval process.
There will be no building over the title boundaries, with the service station infrastructure proper being
within 191 Newtown Road, with additional car parks being located on the adjoining title at 199 Newtown
Road, with vehicular access between.
The hours of operation are proposed to be 24 hours, 7 days a week.
A full set of plans can be found at Appendix B with additional copies accompanying this report.
There will be no mechanical work occurring on the site and no car washing facilities.
Site Access
The traffic generated from the proposed service station is expected to increase traffic flows at the three
existing accesses (two via Risdon Road and one via New Town Road) and at the Risdon Road New Town
Road signalised intersection. This increase in traffic and the impact upon the overall operation of the
accesses and surrounding road network has been considered as a part of this application. A capacity
analysis has been undertaken to determine the overall operational efficiency of the accesses and the
nearby signalised intersection. The access arrangements will be altered so that there is a left in and left
out only onto Newtown Road.
A Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) has been prepared and accompanies this report.
5.
City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982
5.1
Zoning
The site is split across two zonings, as shown in Figure 2 below in accordance with the City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982 (the Scheme). The Commercial and Residential Zone (Precinct 18) applies to 191
New Town Road, while the Residential 1 Zone (Precinct 17) applies to 199 New Town Road.
The adjacent land, across the road to the east is zoned Special Use 1 Zone.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Figure 2: Site Zoning. Source Hobart City Council

(http://www.hobartcity.com.au/Development/Planning/Planning_Schemes/City_of_Hobart_Planning_Scheme_1982)
Zone Objectives and Statement of Desired Future Character

Commercial and Residential Zone
The objective of the Residential Zone (Clause 5.5 of the Scheme) is:
The Objective of the Commercial and Residential Zone is to provide for a diversity of commercial
and professional uses and some important associated residential uses at densities responsive to the
character of historic areas and buildings and/or adjacent Precincts.
The New Town Road Precinct - No. 18
The desired future character statement for precinct number 18 is stated at Clause 5.5.5 as follows:
The Precinct should continue to be an appropriate location for local shopping facilities and major
road commercial uses as well as for residential flat development. Sub-regional shopping facilities
and industrial development should be restricted generally to existing establishments. Increased
provision of seating and shelter for pedestrians is desirable, as is an improvement to the quality of
the townscape by the landscaping of street frontages.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Zonefor1 a planning
relevant toResidential
the application
The
objective
of theand
Residential
Zone 1 (Clause 5.7 of the Scheme) is:
was
The Objective of the Residential 1 Zone is to sustain and enhance the character and amenity of
established
residential
Planning Authority:
Hobart City
Council areas with diverse dwelling-types with minimal intrusion or further
development of non-residential uses not necessary to serve local residents.
The East New Town Precinct - No. 17
The desired future character statement for precinct number 18 is stated at Clause 5.7.2 as follows:
The Precinct should continue as an inner urban residential area consisting principally of single
detached houses set mainly on small to standard size allotments. Changes of use of existing
buildings to flats and accommodation hostels may be permitted in appropriate locations close to
institutional uses and Risdon Road and New Town Road. Commercial activities will generally be
restricted to existing non-conforming uses or be allowed on the scale of a domestic business.
However, local shops may be permitted in conjunction with an existing residential use where there
is a lack of such facility in the vicinity.
The properties shown on Map A1 may be used for a variety of commercial uses in accordance with
Schedule A primarily to facilitate the reuse of the existing institutional buildings. Any development
on these properties shall ensure that the amenity of the surrounding residential area is maintained.
The properties should not be used solely for office purposes or to accommodate a major office
development that would be more appropriately located in Zones 1, 2 or 3. Any application for
development likely to significantly increase traffic volumes will be required to be accompanied by a
traffic impact assessment.
Response:
The use of a service station will fit into the mix of these two zones and the objectives and desired future
character statements above as the service station will service the local residents within the residential
area, while being on the fringe of the existing commercial precinct to the south of the site. The scale of
the development fits within a residential area with the highest point being 5m. The modest landscaping
proposed will assist in enhancing the amenity of the streetscape and will buffer the commercial uses to
the south with the residential uses to the north.
The proposed development complies with the objectives of the Residential Zone and the Commercial and
Residential Zone.
5.2
Schedules
The following design requirements apply:
Schedule A - Use Schedule

The use and development of a service station is not described within the Use Schedule A.1. As the use is
an unlisted use, making it discretionary in both the Commercial and Residential Zone and also the
Residential Zone, as stated in Clause A.7.1.
Schedule C - Height Schedule

All new structures, being the canopy and the bowsers, are under the height of 5m, while the building that
is associated with the shop will be a height of 2.8m. This is consistent with the requirements of Schedule
C - Height Schedule, requiring new buildings to be under 4.8m and structures to be under 6m in height.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
D - Siting
Landscaping Schedule
relevant toSchedule
the application
for a and
planning
Landscaping
received on
the 20 February 2015.
The established residential amenity will be protected and enhanced through the additional landscaping
proposed Hobart
along the
frontages and as a buffer between the overall site boundary (199 New Town
Planning Authority:
Citystreet
Council
Road and the adjacent residential property, as required in Clause D.3.2.2.
Front setback
The front setback will not change as the Maypole Hotel building is setback closer to the front boundaries
than the proposed development.
Side and rear setback The shop is setback 5.8 m from the boundary between 191 and 199 New Town Road and the Canopy 1.4
m.
Schedule E - Traffic Access and Parking Schedule

Traffic Generation
It is likely that the development will result in a material increase in vehicular traffic entering and leaving
the public road. A specific Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) has been provided that analyses the traffic
generation, access requirements and sight distances and provides safe and practicable solutions.
Access Requirements
There are multiple access and egress provisions to the site, to allow vehicles to enter and leave the site in
a forward motion and to provide a safe transition onto the public roads. The access is discussed further
within the TIA.
Parking Standards
As the use is an undefined use, the number of car parks required is 'as determined by Council' and there
is no specific requirement. It is considered that the provision of the additional car parks, as detailed in the
TIA, is sufficient for the use of a service station as the majority of cars will be pulling up at the petrol
bowsers and driving through once they have filled up the car with petrol. Any surplus car parks can be
used as an overflow for the use of the Maypole Hotel located on the same title.
Traffic, Access and Parking Policies For Each Zone
The development policy objectives for traffic, access and parking in each Zone are as set out at Clause 9.1
as follows:
Zone 4 Commercial and Residential Zone
E.9.5 High volumes of traffic pass through Precincts 18 and 11B and its smooth flow should be
maintained. All day non-resident on-street parking is to be discouraged especially in Precincts 11B,
12A and 12B.
Zone 6 Residential 1 Zone
E.9.7 A large number of major through streets cross the Zone, carrying public and private commuter
traffic. On-street parking by commuters should be discouraged in this Zone. Precinct 7 and minor
streets in other parts of the Zone should be restricted to local and service traffic only. Pedestrian or
cycle paths should be developed in Precincts 19A, 19B, 21A, 27A and 27B.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevantResponse:
ThePLN-15-00181-01
non-resident on-street
parking will not be affected by the proposed development; the smooth flow
permit No.
and was
receivedofontraffic
the 20
February
2015.
within
Precinct
18 will be maintained. Similarly, there will be no change to the existing on-street
parking arrangements within the adjacent Precinct 17 as a result of the development. The on-street
Planningparking
Authority:
Hobart City
pressure
mayCouncil
be slightly alleviated, considering that additional on-site parking is being
incorporated into the development.
Schedule F - Heritage Schedule

The existing building on the site, being the Maypole Hotel ('Maypole Tavern' - 191 New Town Road), is a
heritage listed building. The heritage listing means that any development adjoining this building will need
to be designed sensitively to ensure that:
Consideration is given to the definitions, conservations principles, processes and practices set
down in the Burra Charta (Clause F.2.2).
Any new development within or adjacent to a place listed on the Heritage Register shall be in
keeping with and shall not detract from those characteristics of the place which contribute to its
cultural significance (Clause F.4.4).
As consideration must be given to the definitions of the Burra Charta, the following terms have been
explored in order to consider Clause F.4.4.
Place means site, area, land, landscape, building or other work, group of buildings or other works,
and may include components, contents, spaces and views.2
Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or
future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use,
associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of
values for different individuals or groups.3
The cultural significance of the Maypole Hotel may indeed be embodied in different parts of the place,
depending on the individual or group, however as the surrounding area around the building is currently a
car park, which is unlikely to hold any significance in relation to the heritage place. The environs of the
Maypole Hotel building have significantly changed from its early days. Figure 3 below shows the
Maypole Hotel in previous years, prior to the sealing of the existing roads and car parking areas.
2
3
Australia ICOMOS 1999 (Article 1.1)

Australia ICOMOS 1999 (Article 1.2)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Figure 3. Maypole Hotel, Circa 1888 (State Library of Tasmania ADRI: AUTAS001126183722)
The Burra Charta, at Article 8 (Setting) refers to the retention of the visual setting and other relationships
that may contribute to the cultural significance of a place. Factors that influence the visual setting, such
as siting, bulk, form, scale, colour and materials should be considered. The proposed service station has
been setback a significant distance from the Maypole Hotel and as far is practically possible within the
site constraints, as the proximity of the high voltage transmission lines on the adjacent title limit the
placement of the service station any further in that direction. This provides an adequate separation
distance, ensuring that when the Maypole Hotel is viewed from a public place, its visual setting is not
interrupted.
The site is located within a built up urban environment; with the usual level of development one would
expect (signage, residential, large scale commercial, road and other infrastructure). The area surrounding
the Maypole Hotel does not provide significant value to the historic place given this existing context. The
design plans have incorporated landscaping within operational constraints as a visual buffer between the
historic place and the new development.
GHD 2008 (page 29)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
6. State Policies
permit No. The
PLN-15-00181-01
andProjects
was
State Policies and
Act 1993 establishes the process to put in place State Policies in relation to
received onthe
theResource
20 February
2015.
Management and Planning System. State policies seek to ensure a consistent and
coordinated approach and incorporate the minimum amount of regulation necessary to achieve their
objectives of managing natural resources. State Policies are implemented through their integration into
Local Government Planning Schemes.
Currently there are three State Policies:
State Coastal Policy 1996 (Coastal Policy)
State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 (Water Quality Policy)
State Policy on Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 (PAL Policy).
In addition, National Environment Protection Measures (NEPMs) are deemed to be State Policies under
the State Policies and Projects Act 1993.
State Coastal Policy 1996 (Coastal Policy)

The purpose of the State Coastal Policy 1996 is to implement the sustainable development objectives of
the RMPS in Tasmanias coastal areas.
The subject site is located at a distance greater than 1 kilometre from a coastal high water mark and is
therefore not applicable.
State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 (Water Quality Policy)

The purpose of the Water Quality Policy is to achieve the sustainable management of Tasmanias surface
water and groundwater resources by protecting or enhancing their qualities while allowing for
sustainable development in accordance with the objectives of the RMPS.
This proposal is to develop a new service station. There will be some excavations and filling of the site to
install fuel tanks and to provide a flat and accessible building and trafficable area.
The management measures that will be applied to ensure compliance with the Water Quality Policy
include:
1.
Where required, erosion and sediment control measures such as silt stop fencing, sediment traps
and erosion control matting will be installed prior to the commencement of construction activities
2.
Overland drainage flow will be diverted away from disturbed areas and bare soil to outfalls with
sediment traps to reduce the potential for erosion
3.
Stockpiled materials will be managed to ensure that dust and potential runoff is minimised and does
not enter watercourses; and
4.
Erosion control measures and sediment traps will be regularly monitored; sediment material will be
collected and disposed of on site.
State Policy on Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 (PAL Policy)

The purpose of the PAL Policy is to conserve and protect agricultural land so that it remains available for
the sustainable development of agriculture, recognising the particular importance of prime agricultural
land.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant to The
the application
a planning
PAL Policyfor
focuses
on protecting prime agricultural land (land capability classes 1, 2 and 3) from
permit No. conversion
PLN-15-00181-01
and was
to non-agricultural
uses or from being fettered from being used for agricultural activities.
There is no prime agricultural land in the area of the proposed development site.
7.
Conclusion
The development application is for a new service station, which is an undefined use within the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982. The site is zoned both Commercial and Residential Zone, and Residential
1 Zone. The existing building on site is the Maypole Hotel, which is heritage listed, however this has been
considered within the design of the proposed development and appropriate setback distances have been
established to ensure that the heritage listed building can be viewed as an individual building, which will
assist in the prevention of any detraction of the characteristics of the buildings. The additional traffic that
may potentially impact the area as a result of this development has been investigated and
recommendations made through the Traffic Impact Assessment provided as an Appendix (C) to this
report.
The development is considered to meet the provisions of the Scheme.
10
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant to8.
the application
for a planning
References
Australia ICOMOS (International Council on Monuments and Sites) 1999. The Burra Charter : the Australia
Planning Authority:
Councilof cultural significance, The Australian National Committee of ICOMOS on 19
ICOMOS Hobart
charterCity
for places
August 1979 at Burra, South Australia (Revisions were adopted on 23 February 1981, 23 April 1988 and 26
November 1999)
GHD (Harris, K), 2008. Newtown Heritage Review, Hobart City Council, April 2008.
11
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Appendix A
Copy of Title
CPC Agenda
RESULTItem
OF
SEARCH
No. 6.1.4
/ Page No. 56
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
Issued Pursuant to the Land Titles Act 1980
DOCUMENT
SEARCH OF TORRENS TITLE

VOLUME
FOLIO
37218
EDITION
DATE OF ISSUE
16
23-Jun-2008
Planning Authority:
City Council
SEARCH
DATE :Hobart
16-Feb-2015
SEARCH TIME : 03.37 PM
DESCRIPTION OF LAND
City of HOBART
Lot 1 on Diagram 37218
Being the land described in Conveyance No. 64/7053
Derivation : Part of 157A-1R-20Ps Gtd to C Swanston
Prior CT 4552/57
SCHEDULE 1
M183372
TRANSFER to MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD

23-Jun-2008 at 12.01 PM
Registered
SCHEDULE 2
Reservations and conditions in the Crown Grant if any
C596521 AGREEMENT pursuant to Section 71 of the Land Use
Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Registered
06-Oct-2004 at noon
C668702 LEASE to WOOLWORTHS LIMITED of a leasehold estate for
the term of ten (10) years from 1-Jul-2005 of the
premises erected on part of the said land within
described as shown by a site plan on the said Lease.
(together with rights in common with other occupiers
of the parking area and a right of carriageway as
defined in the said Lease.) Registered 24-Feb-2006
at 12.03 PM
C867086 MORTGAGE to Bank of Cyprus Australia Limited
Registered 23-Jun-2008 at 12.02 PM
UNREGISTERED DEALINGS AND NOTATIONS

No unregistered dealings or other notations
Page 1 of 1
Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment
www.thelist.tas.gov.au
CPC Agenda
FOLIO PLAN
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Search Date: 16 Feb 2015
Search Time: 03:38 PM
Volume Number: 37218
Revision Number: 01
Page 1 of 1
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 58
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
VALUER GENERAL, TASMANIA

Issued pursuant to the Valuation of Land Act 2001
PROPERTY ID:
MUNICIPALITY:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
PROPERTY NAME:
TITLE OWNER:
RATE PAYERS:
POSTAL ADDRESS:
2266734
HOBART
MAYPOLE TAVERN
191 NEW TOWN RD
NEW TOWN TAS 7008
MAYPOLE TAVERN
140542/2 : MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD
MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD
27-29 JESSICA RD
CAMPBELLFIELD VIC 3061
DOCUMENT
MAIN IMPROVEMENTS SUMMARY

Improvements:
Improvement Sizes
(Top 3 by Size):
Number of
Bedrooms:
Construction Year
of Main Building:
Roof Material:
Wall Material:
Land Area:
hotel
Area:
12.0 square metres
12.0 square metres
12.0 square metres
Improvement:
BOOTH
HOTEL
HOTEL
1880
Galvanised Iron
Brick
0.4873 hectares
LAST SALES
Contract Date
11/04/2008
23/03/2005
Settlement Date
02/06/2008
18/08/2005
Sale Price
$2,950,000
$2,100,000
LAST VALUATIONS
Date Inspected
24/03/2011
Levels At
01/10/2008
Land
$1,820,000
Capital
$2,500,000
A.A.V.
$192,000
27/01/2009
01/10/2008
$1,820,000
$2,500,000
$175,200
Reason
Drive thru coffee shop business
commenced.
REVALUATION
MULTIPLE TENANCIES
Property ID
Part Occupied
A.A.V.
2096421
2096448
Bottle Shop
Tavern & Flat
$122,400
$52,800
No information obtained from the LIST may be used for direct marketing purposes.
This data is derived from the Valuation List prepared by the Valuer General under the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 2001. These values relate
to the level of values prevailing at the dates of valuation shown.
While all reasonable care has been taken in collecting and recording the information shown above, this Department assumes no liability resulting from
any errors or omissions in this information or from its use in any way.
COPYRIGHT. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part of the report may be copied without the permission of
the General Manager, Information & Land Services, Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment, GPO Box 44 Hobart
7001. Personal Information Protection statement
Search Date: 16/02/2015
Page 1 of 2
CPC Agenda
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 59
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
20/7/2015

3091657
$16,800
DOCUMENT
Explanation of Terms
Property ID - A unique number used for Valuation purposes.
Date Inspected - The date the property was inspected for the valuation.
Levels At - The date at which values of properties are set to determine revaluations and any supplementary
valuations in the revaluation cycle.
Land Value - The value of the property excluding all visible improvements such as buildings, structures, fixtures,
roads, standings, dams, channels, artificially established trees, artificially established pastures and other like
improvements but does include draining, excavation, filling, reclamation, clearing and any other such like invisible
improvements make to the land.
Capital Value - The total value of the property, excluding plant and machinery, and includes the land value.
A.A.V. - The gross annual rental value of the property, excluding GST, municipal rates and land tax, but is not to be
less than 4% (percent) of the capital value.
Multiple Tenancies - Properties that have multiple tenants are assessed for separate A.A.V's. e.g. a house and flat.
Page 2 of 2
CPC Agenda
RESULTItem
OF
SEARCH
No. 6.1.4
/ Page No. 60
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES

DOCUMENT
VOLUME
FOLIO
140542
EDITION
DATE OF ISSUE
23-Jun-2008
SEARCH DATE : 20-Feb-2015

DESCRIPTION OF LAND
City of HOBART
Lot 2 on Sealed Plan 140542
Derivation : Part of 157A-1R-20Ps. Gtd. to C. Swanston
Prior CT 63810/1
SCHEDULE 1
M183372
TRANSFER to MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD

23-Jun-2008 at 12.01 PM
Registered
SCHEDULE 2
SP 140542 EASEMENTS in Schedule of Easements
SP 140542 FENCING PROVISION in Schedule of Easements
C668702 LEASE of EASEMENT to WOOLWORTHS LIMITED for the term
of ten (10) years from 1-Jul-2005 of the benefit of a
right in common with other occupiers of the parking
area and a right of carriageway over part of the said
land within described as defined therein and shown on
the plan annexed thereto Registered 24-Feb-2006 at
12.03 PM
C867086 MORTGAGE to Bank of Cyprus Australia Limited
Registered 23-Jun-2008 at 12.02 PM

Page 1 of 1
CPC Agenda
SCHEDULE
EASEMENTS
Item No. OF
6.1.4 / Page
No. 61
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Search Date: 03 Oct 2014
Revision Number: 01
Page 1 of 3
CPC Agenda
SCHEDULE
EASEMENTS
Item No. OF
6.1.4 / Page
No. 62
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Revision Number: 01
Page 2 of 3
CPC Agenda
SCHEDULE
EASEMENTS
Item No. OF
6.1.4 / Page
No. 63
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Revision Number: 01
Page 3 of 3
CPC Agenda
FOLIO PLAN
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Revision Number: 01
Page 1 of 1
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 65
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

PROPERTY ID:
MUNICIPALITY:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
PROPERTY NAME:
TITLE OWNER:
RATE PAYERS:
POSTAL ADDRESS:
2266734
HOBART
MAYPOLE TAVERN
191 NEW TOWN RD
NEW TOWN TAS 7008
MAYPOLE TAVERN
MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD
27-29 JESSICA RD
CAMPBELLFIELD VIC 3061
DOCUMENT

Improvements:
Improvement Sizes
(Top 3 by Size):
Number of
Bedrooms:
Construction Year
of Main Building:
Roof Material:
Wall Material:
Land Area:
hotel
Area:
12.0 square metres
12.0 square metres
12.0 square metres
Improvement:
BOOTH
HOTEL
HOTEL
1880
Galvanised Iron
Brick
0.4873 hectares
LAST SALES
Contract Date
11/04/2008
23/03/2005
Settlement Date
02/06/2008
18/08/2005
Sale Price
$2,950,000
$2,100,000
LAST VALUATIONS
Date Inspected
24/03/2011
Levels At
01/10/2008
Land
$1,820,000
Capital
$2,500,000
A.A.V.
$192,000
27/01/2009
01/10/2008
$1,820,000
$2,500,000
$175,200
Reason
Drive thru coffee shop business
commenced.
REVALUATION
MULTIPLE TENANCIES
Property ID
Part Occupied
A.A.V.
2096421
2096448
Bottle Shop
Tavern & Flat
$122,400
$52,800
Page 1 of 2
CPC Agenda
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 66
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
20/7/2015

3091657
$16,800
DOCUMENT
Page 2 of 2
CPC Agenda
RESULTItem
OF
SEARCH
No. 6.1.4
/ Page No. 67
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
SEARCH DATE : 03-Oct-2014

VOLUME
FOLIO
158085
EDITION
DATE OF ISSUE
28-Oct-2009
DESCRIPTION OF LAND
City of HOBART
Lot 1 on Plan 158085
Being the land described in Conveyance GL1268
Excepting thereout Part of Lot 1 (SP156823) 609m2
Derivation : Part of 157A-1R-20P Gtd to Charles Swanston
Prior CT 142372/1
SCHEDULE 1
C741614
TRANSFER to ENNIO ALDO DIDOMENICO

05-Oct-2006 at noon
Registered
SCHEDULE 2
C740785 BURDENING TRANSMISSION LINE EASEMENT with the benefit
of a restriction as to user of land in favour of
Transend Networks Pty Ltd over whole of the said
land within described Registered 03-Nov-2006 at noon
M208078 CAVEAT by MANTZIS HOLDINGS PTY LTD Registered
21-Nov-2008 at noon

Page 1 of 1
CPC Agenda
FOLIO PLAN
20/7/2015
RECORDER OF TITLES
DOCUMENT
Revision Number: 01
Page 1 of 1
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 69
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

PROPERTY ID:
MUNICIPALITY:
PROPERTY ADDRESS:
TITLE OWNER:
RATE PAYERS:
POSTAL ADDRESS:
5516065
HOBART
DOCUMENT
199 NEW TOWN RD
NEW TOWN TAS 7008
158085/1 : ENNIO ALDO DIDOMENICOpermit No. PLN-15-00181-01 and was
DIDOMENICO, ENNIO ALDO
6 RISDON RD
NEW TOWN TAS 7008

Improvements:
Number of
Bedrooms:
Construction Year
of Main Building:
Roof Material:
Wall Material:
Land Area:
VL
0.1922 hectares
LAST SALES
Contract Date
21/07/2006
Settlement Date
03/10/2006
Sale Price
$30,000
LAST VALUATIONS
Date Inspected
04/02/2010
01/03/2009
Levels At
01/10/2008
01/10/2008
Land
$60,000
$247,000
Capital
$60,000
$247,000
A.A.V.
$2,400
$9,880
Reason
A052376 Values amended on Review
REVALUATION
Page 1 of 2
CPC Agenda
Item No. 6.1.4

/ Page No. 70
PROPERTY
INFORMATION
REPORT
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
Page 2 of 2
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Appendix B
Full Set of Plans
Rev.
HAZ-1907
HAZ-1907-A01
HAZ-1907-A02
HAZ-1907-A03
HAZ-1907-L01
HAZ-1907-H01
UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE PLAN
LANDSCAPE PLAN
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
DRAWING LIST
DRAWING TITLE
SITE SPECIFIC DRAWINGS
DWG. No.
DOCUMENT
HAZ-1907
DRAWING No
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
DRAWING LIST
DRAWN
APPROVED
LPD
SCALE
DATE
ISSUE/AMT
NTS
BY
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
FINDELLA PTY LTD
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
N
O
D
R I S
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
INITIAL HAZKEM ISSUE
PROPOSED KERB / ENTRY AMENDED
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907- A01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
O N
D
S
R I
DOCUMENT
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:300 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907-A02
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
ABC
PETROL
ABC
PETROL
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
2700
ABC
PETROL
DOCUMENT
BOUNDARY
5000
4800
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:150 @A3
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
DATE
HAZ-1907- A03
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
BY
JS
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SHOP
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3
T2
T5
T4
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
LPD
BY
LPD
HAZ-1907-L01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
LANSCAPE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
DIANELLA TASMANICA
0.5-2.0m WIDTH
0.5-2m HEIGHT
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA
0.1-1m WIDTH
0.5m HEIGHT
LEGEND
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
ROLL-OVER KERB
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
00
DN8
PIT
NEW SEWER
CONNECTION
RETAINING WALL
(2.0 - 2.5m HIGH)
FROM SERVICE
STATION AREA VIA
OIL INTERCEPTOR
EXISTING SW TO
BE ABANDONED
TO EXISTING
OUTLET
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING SEWER
OPEN DRAIN
G SEW
ER
EXIST
IN
RETAINING WALL
(2.0 - 2.5m HIGH)
OPEN DRAIN
NEW WATER METER

TO TAS WATER
REQUIREMENTS
PK
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
HAZ-1907- H01
APPROVED
MDC
DATE
DRAWING No
NORTH
DESIGNED
HAZ-1907
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
PRELIMINARY
BY
MDC
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
OPEN DRAIN
CAR PARKING
DN225 SW PIPE
EXISTING WATER CONNECTION

TO BE ABANDONED
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
Contact
Dion Lester
(03) 6210 1473
dlester@pittsh.com.au
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Brisbane
Level 2
276 Edward Street
Brisbane QLD 4000
T: (07) 3221 0080
F: (07) 3221 0083
Hobart
199 Macquarie Street
GPO Box 94
Hobart TAS 7001
T: (03) 6210 1400
F: (03) 6223 1299
Devonport
Level 1
35 Oldaker Street
PO Box 836
Devonport TAS 7310
T: (03) 6424 1641
F: (03) 6424 9215
Launceston
Level 4
113 Cimitiere Street
PO Box 1409
Launceston TAS 7250
T: (03) 6323 1900
F: (03) 6334 4651
Melbourne
Level 1, HWT Tower
40 City Road
Southbank VIC 3006
PO Box 259
South Melbourne VIC 3205
T: (03) 9682 5290
F: (03) 9682 5292
E: info@pittsh.com.au
W: www.pittsh.com.au
incorporated as
Pitt & Sherry (Operations) Pty Ltd
ABN 67 140 184 309
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Traffic Impact Assessment

Service Station Development
Maypole Complex
191 New Town Road, New Town
Prepared for:
Kon Mantsiz
Project Number:
HB14573
Date:
20 February 2015
Rev 00
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This
document
Table of Contents
Glossary of Terms .............................................................................................................................................
i
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................
1
1.1
Background ................................................................................................................................ 1
Location and Site Description ............................................................................................................... 1
Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 2
3.1
Maypole Tavern Site .................................................................................................................. 2
3.2
199 New Town Road .................................................................................................................. 3
3.3
Surrounding Road Network ....................................................................................................... 3
3.4
Crash History .............................................................................................................................. 3
3.5
Site Access.................................................................................................................................. 4
3.6
On-Street Parking....................................................................................................................... 4
3.7
Traffic Operation ........................................................................................................................ 4
The Proposed Service Station ............................................................................................................. 11
4.1
General..................................................................................................................................... 11
4.2
Petrol Deliveries and Internal Circulation ................................................................................ 11
4.3
Parking ..................................................................................................................................... 12
4.4
Public Transport ....................................................................................................................... 12
Review of Proposed Development...................................................................................................... 13
5.1
General..................................................................................................................................... 13
5.2
Access Width ............................................................................................................................ 13
5.3
Traffic Operation / Traffic Analysis .......................................................................................... 14
5.4
Parking ..................................................................................................................................... 20
5.5
Road Safety .............................................................................................................................. 22
Turning Movement Paths.................................................................................................................... 23
Summary of Findings ........................................................................................................................... 23
List of figures
Figure 1: Locality Plan (base image from Google earth) Not to scale ........................................................ 2
List of tables
Table 1: Traffic volumes ................................................................................................................................. 5
Table 2: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection AM Peak Period............................... 6
Table 3: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection PM Peak Period ............................... 7
Table 4: Eastern access on Risdon Road AM Peak Period .............................................................................. 8
Table 5: Eastern access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period .............................................................................. 8
Table 6: Western access on Risdon Road AM Peak Period ............................................................................ 9
Table 7: Western access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period ............................................................................ 9
Table 8: Access on New Town Road AM Peak Period .................................................................................. 10
Table 9: Access on New Town Road PM Peak Period .................................................................................. 10
Table 10: Sight Distance Requirements........................................................................................................ 14
Table 11: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection AM Peak Period........................... 16
Table 12: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection PM Peak Period ........................... 16
Table 13: Eastern access on Risdon Road AM Peak Period .......................................................................... 17
Table 14: Eastern access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period .......................................................................... 18
Table 15: Eastern Access left OUT only AM Peak Period ............................................................................. 18
Table 16: Eastern Access left OUT only PM Peak Period .............................................................................. 19
Table 17: Eastern Access left IN only AM Peak Period ................................................................................. 19
Table 18: Eastern Access left IN only PM Peak Period ................................................................................. 19
Table 19: AS2890.1 parking layout requirements ........................................................................................ 21
pitt&sherry ref: HB14573H002 TIA 31P Rev 00/SJ/bb
CPC Agenda
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Appendix E
Appendix F
Appendix G
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Crash History
Traffic Turning Movement Survey Data
SIDRA Model output Base Case Model
Development Plans
Sight Distance Photos
SIDRA Model Outputs 2015 and 2025 Model
Turning movement Plans
Prepared by:
.
Shivani Jordan
Date:
20 February 2015
Reviewed by:
.
Ross Mannering
Date:
20 February 2015
Authorised by:
.
Dion Lester
Date:
20 February 2015
Report Revision History

Rev
No.
Description
Prepared by
Reviewed by
Authorised by
Date
2015 pitt&sherry
This document is and shall remain the property of pitt&sherry. The document may only be used for the purposes for
which it was commissioned and in accordance with the Terms of Engagement for the commission. Unauthorised use
of this document in any form is prohibited.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
received AADT
on the 20 February 2015.
20/7/2015
Glossary of Terms
Annual Average Daily Traffic - The total number of vehicles travelling

in both directions passing a point in a year divided by the number of
days in a year.
Access
The driveway by which vehicles and/or pedestrians enter and/or

leave property adjacent to a road.
Austroads
The association of Australian and New Zealand road transport and

traffic authorities and includes the Australian Local Government
Association.
Crash
An apparently unpremeditated event which results in death or injury

to a person or property damage and is attributable to the movement
of a road vehicle on a public road (including vehicles entering or
leaving a public road).
Delay
The additional travel time experienced by a vehicle or pedestrian

with reference to a base travel time (e.g. the free flow travel time).
GFA
Gross Floor Area, a measurement of a buildings useable floor area

and can often be linked to the traffic generation from a particular
site.
Intersection
The place at which two or more roads meet or cross.
km/h
kilometres per hour
Level of Service (LoS)
An index of the operational performance of traffic on a given traffic

lane, carriageway or road when accommodating various traffic
volumes under different combinations of operating conditions. It is
usually defined in terms of the convenience of travel and safety
performance. A LoS A indicates excellent performance and a LoS F
indicates poor performance. A LoS C and above is considered
acceptable in most cases. SIDRA calculates level of service based on
the ratio of the average travel speed to the average desired speed.
metres
RMS
Roads and Maritime Services - The New South Wales Government

Department which manages the road network in New South Wales.
Movement
A stream of vehicles that enters from the same approach and

departs from the same exit (i.e. with the same origin and
destination).
Sight Distance
The distance, measured along the road over which visibility occurs
between a driver and an object or between two drivers at specific
heights above the carriageway in their lane of travel.
SISD
Safe Intersection Sight Distance - The sight distance provides

sufficient distance for a driver of a vehicle on the major road to
observe a vehicle on a minor road approach moving into a collision
situation and to decelerate to a stop before reaching the collision
point.
Speed
Distance travelled per unit time.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Traffic Growth Factor
A factor used to estimate the percentage annual increase in traffic

volume.
Trip
A one-way vehicular movement from one point to another excluding

the return journey. Therefore, a vehicle entering and leaving a land
use is counted as two trips. (RMS Guide to Traffic Generating
Developments).
vpd
vehicles per day - The number of vehicles travelling in both directions

passing a point during a one hour period.
vph
vehicles per hour - The number of vehicles travelling in both

directions passing a point during a day from midnight to midnight.
DOCUMENT
ii
CPC Agenda
1.
Introduction
1.1
Background
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
A service station and associated parking is proposed for the Maypole Tavern site at 191 New Town Road
Authority:
Council
and on 199 New Town Road inPlanning
New Town.
The Hobart
currentCity
owners,
Mantzis Holdings Pty Ltd, intend to
construct a service station and associated parking north east of the current Tavern buildings on the site.
Access to the site is currently located on Risdon Road and New Town Road.
Mantzis Holdings Pty Ltd, owner of the site, has engaged pitt&sherry to undertake an independent Traffic
Impact Assessment (TIA) for the proposed development to form part of a Development Application. The
TIA will address the traffic generation impacts, car parking and access requirements, and road safety
matters for the proposed development.
This report has been prepared in accordance with the Department of State Growths Framework for
Undertaking Traffic Impact Assessments and details the findings of the traffic investigations undertaken
for the proposed development.
2.
Location and Site Description
The proposed service station will be located at 191 and 199 New Town Road in New Town under land
titles 37218/1 and 140542/2. The site is located on the north corner of the Risdon Road - New Town
Road Forster Street intersection. Figure 1 shows the overall development site in the context of the
surrounding development and the road network. The total site is approximately 4950 m2 and
approximately 1500 m2 of this land is proposed for the Service Station.
A portion of the land is leased to Maypole Tavern and BWS Liquor Store at 191 New Town Road. 199 New
Town Road is currently undeveloped and a transmission line owned by TasNetworks runs along the far
western extremity of the undeveloped land.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Towardsand
Moonah
was
Towards Brooker
Highway

New Town Road
Proposed Service
Station
Risdon Road
N
Forster Street
Pirie Street
Towards North
Hobart
Montagu Street
Towards North
Hobart
Figure 1: Locality Plan (base image from Google earth) Not to scale
The proposed site is bounded by Risdon Road to the east, New Town Road to the west, residential
development to the north of the site and the Risdon Road New Town Road Forster Road intersection
and commercial development to the south of the site. The land slopes upwards from south to north and
is surrounded by residential and commercial development.
There are currently three access driveways onto the Maypole site, one is via New Town Road and the
other two are via Risdon Road.
There is a separate access for 199 New Town Road.
3.
Existing Conditions
3.1
Maypole Tavern Site
The existing building fronting New Town Road is leased to Maypole Tavern and contains a bar and
restaurant with a capacity of approximately 180 seats. A BWS Drive through liquor Shop occupies the
northern portion of the building. Access to the Tavern and bottle shop is via New Town Road and Risdon
Road. There are two accesses off Risdon Road, one of which is a left turn out only and is predominately
used by the BWS bottle shop customers. The second access on New Town Road and the Risdon road
access allow two way ingress and egress to and from the site. A takeaway coffee shop temporary
structure approximately 46m2 in size is provided on the far northern corner of the site. This shop will be
relocated to facilitate the construction of the service station.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is one
the documents
Off-street
carofparking
is provided on-site and three drive through bays for vehicles to access liquor shop.
199
New 2015.
Town Road
received 3.2
on the 20
February
There is an existing TasNetworks transmission line on the far northern extremity of the land. The
remaining land is undeveloped. There is a driveway off New Town Road to enable access to the
transmission line.
3.3
Surrounding Road Network
The development site is located on the corner of New Town Road and Risdon Road. New Town Road
crosses Risdon Road at a four way signalised intersection with Forster Street.
New Town Road and Risdon Road are both Hobart City Council owned major distributor roads. New
Town Road runs parallel with the Brooker Avenue approximately 370m east. New Town Road provides
the north-south connection between Derwent Park and North Hobart. In the vicinity of the development
New Town Road is a three lane, two way road with two southbound lanes and one northbound lane. A
median strip approximately 2m wide defined by pavement markings is provided on New Town Road. The
median provides protection for right turning vehicles. New Town Road has a total sealed width of
approximately 15m (lip of gutter to lip of gutter) including the median strip. Restricted parking is
permitted on both sides of the road in the vicinity of the development. Footpaths are provided on both
sides of the road. A bus stop is located immediately east of the existing access on New Town Road.
Risdon Road provides a transport route from the Brooker Highway to New Town Road as well as
providing access to adjacent residential and commercial land use. Risdon Road has a sealed width of
approximately 16m. On-street parking is restricted on Risdon Road in the vicinity of the development.
Footpaths are provided on both sides of Risdon Road. A pedestrian refuge is provided immediately east
of the development access on Risdon Road. West of the existing access there is a central island
approximately 1m wide that extends to the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street signalised
intersection. Gaps are provided at intermittent spacings along the central island to enable pedestrians to
cross the road safely.
The speed limit on New Town Road and Risdon Road is subject to the general urban speed limit of
50km/h.
3.4
Crash History
The crash history in the vicinity of the proposed development over a five year period up to 3 November
2014 has been obtained from the Department of State Growth. A copy of the history including a collision
diagram for the intersection of New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street is included in Appendix A.
The crash history indicates that there have been 39 crashes reported at the New Town Road Risdon
Road Forster Street intersection. Of the 39 crashes, five resulted in minor injury, three resulted in first
aid and the remaining 32 resulted in property damage only. From the crash data it appears that a
majority of the reported crashes at the intersection are caused by cross traffic conflicts and rear end
crashes. At the New Town Road southbound lanes, the reported crashes are predominately caused by
rear end type crashes and through traffic colliding with right turning vehicles (cross traffic type) from the
New Town Road south approach. On the Risdon Road approach the crashes are predominately rear end
type crashes.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
one seven
of the crashes
documents
There iswere
reported on New Town Road that were related to ingressing and egressing the
relevant to
the
application
for
existing site access. aOfplanning
the seven, six occurred at the northern access and all resulted in property damage
only.
TheFebruary
crashes 2015.
at this access are predominately related to motorists emerging from driveway and
received on
the 20
entering New Town Road. These crashes may be due to the lack of sight distance at the access. The
crash occurred
at the southern access and resulted in first aid.
Planning remaining
Authority: Hobart
City Council
There was only one crash reported at the northern site access off Risdon Road which has resulted in first
aid injury. In addition there are 17 reported crashes in the vicinity of the site accesses on Risdon Road
which are not directly related to vehicles ingressing and egressing the site.
In summary the crash data indicates that there are a series of rear end crashes and cross traffic type
crashes at the New Town Road - Risdon Road Forster Street which have predominately resulted in
property damage. It is recommended that a thorough review of the intersection phasing configuration
and layout be undertaken to review and identify any safety problems.
In general, the number and severity of the crashes is considered low given the traffic volumes at the
intersection.
3.5
Site Access
There are two existing accesses off New Town Road approximately 55m and 80m from the New Town
Road - Risdon Road Forster Street intersection and two off Risdon Road at approximately 65m and
approximately 79m from the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street intersection. Left turns out
movements are only permitted at the western access on Risdon Road and the access is predominately
used by the BWS bottle shop. There is a gap in the solid median on Risdon Road to enable right turns into
the eastern access. On New Town Road, in the vicinity of the development, there is a central lane marked
for vehicles to turn into the access safely.
The crossover width is approximately 6.7m wide. The eastern access on Risdon Street has a crossover
width of approximately 6.5m and the western access has a crossover width of 6.5m.
3.6
On-Street Parking
On-street parking in Risdon Road, New Town Road and Forster Street is not permitted in the vicinity of
the development. Further north on New Town Road on-street parking is provided outside commercial
businesses adjacent to the road.
3.7
Traffic Operation
3.7.1 Traffic Data

Skyhigh Traffic was engaged by pitt&sherry to undertake traffic surveys on the road network surrounding
the site and on the existing accesses to the site to determine the traffic currently generated by the
existing development. The surveys included turning movement counts of the intersections / accesses
below:
Intersection of New Town Road, Risdon Road and Forster Street
Access on New Town Road from 191 New Town Road
Eastern and western accesses on Risdon Road
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
The traffic
counts
undertaken at the above junctions and accesses on Wednesday 5 November 2014
This document
is one
of thewere
documents
between
3:00pm
5:30pm
in the PM Peak and Thursday 6 November 2014 between 7:30am - 9:30am in
the
AM peak. The and
survey
permit No.
PLN-15-00181-01
wasinvolved mounting a temporary camera at each location during the peak
received periods
on the 20
February
2015. of the footage to determine traffic volumes and vehicle classification.
and
later analysis
Planning AAuthority:
Hobart
City Council
copy of the
collected
traffic count data is included in Appendix B. The network peak hours identified in
the Skyhigh Traffic surveys for the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street intersection, New
Town Road access and Risdon Road access were 8:00am 9:00am in the AM Peak hour and 4:30pm
5:30pm in the PM Peak hour.
A summary of the traffic volumes are outlined in Table 1.
Table 1: Traffic volumes
Date
Estimated ADT
(vpd) (1)
New Town Road (north of Risdon Road)
November 2014
30,420
New Town Road (south of Risdon Road)
November 2014
22,720
Risdon Road (east of New Town Road)
November 2014
20,780
Forster Street (west of New Town Road)
November 2014
15,400
Location
Notes: (1) Estimated ADT based on survey peak hour volumes representing 10% of the average daily traffic (Traffic Engineering
and Management (Volume 2) 2003 page 9.1.4).
3.7.2 Traffic Analysis Base Case Model

The following intersections and accesses have been analysed using SIDRA to assess the current operation
performance of the intersections, as well as the operational performance of the existing network
configuration in 2025 without any new developments. For the purpose of the analysis a compound
growth rate of 2% has been assumed for existing traffic volumes using each of the intersections.
Access on New Town Road
Traffic volumes obtained from the turning movement surveys (included in Appendix B) were used to
inform the analysis.
The full SIDRA output files are included in Appendix C.
The LoS is based on the delay at the intersection only and SIDRA uses the definitions as outlined in the
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000. See Table 11.2 of the HCM for the LoS definitions.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Table 11.2 LoS Definitions from HCM 2000
New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection

New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection has been analysed with SIDRA software. The
SIDRA results for the AM Peak and PM Peak is summarised in Table 2 and Table 3.
The phasing configuration used in this model matches the Department of State Growths SCATS nominal
phase split data. It must be noted that the actual phase split is continually adjusted to suit the real-time
traffic demand at the intersection.
Table 2: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection AM Peak Period
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
New Town Road (south approach)
57.8
0.572
93.2
Risdon Road
63.2
0.842
110.3
New Town Road (north approach)
65.3
0.830
158.5
Forster Street
49.8
0.756
118.3
76.6
0.724
170.8
Risdon Road
193
1.071
285.6
180.8
1.070
431.7
Forster Street
87.9
0.951
244.7
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is one
of the
Table 3: New
Town
Roaddocuments
Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection PM Peak Period
Average Delay
Level of Service
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.856
90.4
64.9
0.827
94.6
58.7
0.879
200.1
Forster Street
53.8
0.625
93
190.4
1.043
175.2
Risdon Road
173.1
1.054
254.9
126
1.020
451.9
Forster Street
76.6
0.901
188.4
(worst
movement)
seconds
(Worst
Movement)
67.4
Risdon Road
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
In the AM peak hour, the SIDRA model results show LoS E for all right turn movements accept for the
Forster Street approach with the maximum delay of 65.3 seconds occurring at the New Town Road (north
approach). The largest queue is currently experienced at the New Town Road (north approach) with 95%
back of queue of 158.5m (32 vehicles). Similiar to the AM peak, in the PM peak the right turn movements
are experiencing a LoS E with the New Town Road (south approach) experiencing a maximum delay of
67.4 seconds.
Clause 3.2.4 of the Austroads Guide to Traffic Management Part 3: Traffic Studies and Analysis 2013
outlines that the target degrees of saturation should be 90% for a signalised intersection. The analysis
shows that currently the intersection is just below the target degree of saturation.
The analysis of the intersection in 2025 shows capacity issues at this intersection as the degree of
saturation for a number of movements increases to over 90% (exceeding the degree of saturation target);
during the AM peak hour and PM peak hour, the degree of saturation increases to more than 100%.
Significant queues of up to 90 vehicles (95% back of queue length of 451m) are expected to occur on the
New Town Road (north approach).

The existing accesses off Risdon Road has been analysed with SIDRA software. The SIDRA results for the
AM Peak and PM Peak is summarised in Tables 4 to 7.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
Table 4: Eastern access on Risdon Road AM Peak Period
relevant
Average Delay
20/7/2015
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
Risdon Road (east approach)
11.6
0.185
0.7
Site Access
29.9
0.044
0.9
Risdon Road (west approach)
8.2
0.262
0.0
12.9
0.225
1.0
Site Access
51.8
0.083
1.6
8.2
0.319
0.0
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
13.3
0.155
0.6
Site Access
26.2
0.173
3.6
8.2
0.068
0.0
15.9
0.189
0.8
Site Access
53.2
0.349
7.3
8.2
0.082
0.0
Junction
Planning Authority:
HobartApproach
City Council
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
Table 5: Eastern access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
In the AM and PM peak the SIDRA results show that the site access is currently operating at a LOS D with
a maximum delay of 31 seconds and 26.2 seconds. All other approaches are operating at a LOS B or less.
In 2025, the SIDRA results show that the site access will operate at a LoS F with a maximum of 51.8
seconds in the AM peak and 53.2 seconds in the PM peak. These delays are considered acceptable for an
access onto a major road with relatively high volumes.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
ThisTable
document
is one
of on
theRisdon
documents
6: Western
access
Road AM Peak Period
Average Delay
20/7/2015
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.0
0.185
0.0
Site Access
9.4
0.034
0.9
0.0
0.151
0.0
0.0
0.225
0.0
Site Access
9.8
0.037
0.9
0.0
0.184
0.0
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.0
0.155
0.0
Site Access
13.3
0.023
0.5
0.0
0.066
0.0
0.0
0.189
0.0
Site Access
16.4
0.032
0.7
0.1
0.080
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
Table 7: Western access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
The SIDRA analysis results indicate that the western access on Risdon Road is operating at a LoS B with
acceptable queues and delays. All other approaches are operating at a LoS A. It is therefore considered
that this junction is currently operating efficiently.
In 2025 the analysis results show that the site access operates at a LoS C in the PM peak with an average
delay of 16.4 seconds. Based on the results the access is considered to operate efficiently in 2025.
Accesses on New Town Road

A summary of the SIDRA model outputs for the access on New Town Road are included in Table 8 and
Table 9.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
This document
is one
theTown
documents
Table 8: Access
onofNew
Road AM Peak Period
Average Delay
20/7/2015
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
15.8
0.479
0.2
Site Access
54.1
0.158
3.0
8.2
0.484
0.0
21.5
0.583
0.4
Site Access
283.2
0.576
10.6
8.2
0.588
0.0
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
18.2
0.417
0.1
Site Access
72.7
0.042
0.8
8.2
0.538
0.0
27.8
0.508
0.1
Site Access
289.4
0.180
3.0
8.2
0.655
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results

Table 9: Access on New Town Road PM Peak Period
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
In the AM peak and PM peak the SIDRA model results shows that all movements out of the access are
currently experiencing a LoS F with maximum delays up to 72.7 seconds. The delays at the access
approach increases to a maximum of 289.4 seconds in 2025. The 95% back of queue distance is 10.6m (2
vehicles) for all movements at the access. In general, the results show that there will be difficulty
egressing the site via the New Town Road access during AM peak and PM peak due to the limited gaps in
traffic on New Town Road.
10
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
The Proposed
Service
relevant4.
to the application
for a planning
4.1
20/7/2015
Station
General
PlanningThe
Authority:
Hobart
Citythe
Council
proposal
involves
construction of a service station, convenience store and associated light vehicle
car parking north west of the existing Maypole Tavern building. A copy of the proposed site plan is
included in Appendix D and this has formed the basis for this traffic impact assessment. The proposed
development includes excavation and levelling of the existing ground where necessary, construction of
retaining walls, building (convenience store), petrol tanks, bowsers and accesses.
Parking for light vehicles will be provided adjacent to the existing transmission towers. 22 light vehicle
parking spaces will be provided for the service station and associated convenience store. These spaces
can be shared between the other uses on- site. The existing access on New Town Road will be removed
and replaced with separate entry and exit driveways.
Usual operating hours proposed for the service station will be 24 hours per day 7 days per week.
4.1.1 Vehicular Access

The existing accesses on to New Town Road will be removed and replaced with two vehicular access
driveways (for separate entry and exit) approximately 52 m and 76 m north of Risdon Road. The
proposed driveway accesses on New Town Road will operate as a left in left out only arrangement
restricting all right turns into the site from New Town Road. A solid median New Town Road and signage
at the access driveways is recommended to discourage vehicles from turning right into the accesses.
Based on the development plans, the driveway entry will be approximately 8.6m wide and the exit
driveway will be approximately 5.3m wide.
The two accesses on Risdon Road will be retained.
4.2
Petrol Deliveries and Internal Circulation
Petrol trucks will arrive from the north and enter the site via the proposed New Town Road northern
access and exit from the existing Risdon Road western access. The development plans show the truck
movements in and out of the site. Petrol trucks will arrive outside the surrounding road networks peak
hour.
The positioning of the two New Town Road accesses and the petrol bowsers will allow for customers to
move around the site in clockwise direction. Vehicles are to enter from the New Town Road northern
access, fill up with petrol from the petrol station bowsers and exit from the New Town Road southern
access.
This is expected to be the predominant movement for light vehicle entering the site to access the service
station.
11
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant4.2.1
to the application
for a planning
Pedestrians
proposed
is located within close proximity to shops and other commercial
receivedAsonthe
the 20
Februarydevelopment
2015.
development it is expected that there is a moderate level of pedestrian activity along Risdon Road and
PlanningNew
Authority:
Council
Town Hobart
Road. City
There
are footpaths on both sides of Risdon Road and New Town Road which will
facilitate pedestrian access to and from the proposed development. In the vicinity of the development
the footpath on New Town Road varies between approximately 1.5m 1.8m and the footpath on Risdon
Road is approximately 2.3m wide.
On Risdon Road, there is a pedestrian refuge approximately 1m wide on Risdon Road located between
the Maypole northern access and the Kmart access to enable pedestrians to cross the road. Pedestrians
are also able to cross Risdon Road and New Town Road via the Risdon Road New Town Road signalised
intersection.
4.2.2 Cyclists
There are no provisions for cyclists in the vicinity of the development.
4.3
Parking
The development plans in Appendix D include details of the proposed car parking arrangements for the
service station and alterations to the layout of the existing car park. A total of 55 light vehicle spaces are
proposed for the site including 33 spaces currently provided on-site for the use of the Maypole Tavern
and the BWS drive through liquor store and two existing car spaces designated for people with
disabilities. This suggests that 22 additional car spaces are proposed on-site as part of the service station
development.
4.4
Public Transport
New Town Road and Risdon Road are part of the Metro Tasmania public transport network. Metro bus
routes 180 and 190 travel between Hobart City and Glenorchy commercial centre or West Moonah via
New Town Road and Risdon Road and operate on a regular basis. There is also a Hail and Ride service
along New Town Road which is more frequent than the other Metro bus services. It is very unlikely that
customers will be using these services service station.
A Metro bus stop is located on New Town Road in close proximity to the development, immediately
south of the existing access.
The Department of State Growth is currently undertaking a study, The Glenorchy to Hobart CBD Transit
Corridor Study, which has commenced in September 2011. The study is expected to aid the development
of the Transit Corridor Plan along Main Road and New Town Road. Department of State Growth is
collaboratively working together with Hobart City Council and Metro to develop bus priority and bus stop
optimisation measures to improve the reliability of buses travelling between Hobart CBD and Glenorchy
on the Main Road Corridor. A copy of the development plans have been submitted to the Department of
State Growth to consider the relocation of the bus stop on New Town Road as part of this project.
12
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
5. is one
Review
of Proposed
This document
of the documents
5.1
received on
the 20General
February 2015.
20/7/2015
Development
Part E6.0 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 sets out the requirements for access widths and car
parking. In Table E6.2 and E6.3 there are certain specific requirements for the access widths for vehicles,
car parking widths and car parking length. As such, the proposed development has also been assessed
against the requirements of City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and AS 2890:2004 Australian Standards
for Off-street car parking. Relevant sections of the AUSTROADS Guide have been referenced where
appropriate and the traffic modelling package SIDRA has been used to assess the likely impact of the
development on the surrounding road network.
5.2
Access Width
Table E6.2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 specifies an access width of two 3.0m lanes plus
two 1.5m footways for sites with over 21 off-street parking spaces.
Table 1.1 of AS2890.1 Parking Facilities, Part 1: Off Road Car Parking classifies off-street parking facilities
based on the likely duration and turnover of parking spaces. According to Table 1.1 the car park used for
staff and customers of the service station are considered to be User Class 3. Based on the User Class, for
a site fronting a local road and accessing between 25 and 100 car parking spaces, the development would
require a category 2 access driveway. Table 3.2 of AS2890.1:2004 requires a category 2 driveway to have
an entry width of exit width of between 6m to 9m. AS2890.1 outlines that if driveways are separated,
both entry and exit widths should be 3m.
The access driveways off New Town Road and Risdon Road exceed the requirements of AS2890.1 and the
Planning Scheme. Both ingress and egress access widths exceed the requirements of the Planning
Scheme and AS2890.1.
5.2.1 Sight Distance

The sight distance was assessed at the proposed site access via New Town Road and existing site accesses
via Risdon Road to ensure there is adequate visibility. Measurements were taken during a site inspection
on 13 February 2015 from at a point 3m (minimum distance) back from the edge of road in accordance
with Figure 3.2 of AUSTROADS Guide to Road Design Part 4A: Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections.
According to AUSTROADS guidelines sight distance should be provided in the design of all intersections,
including approach sight distance (ASD), safe intersection sight distance (SISD) and minimum gap sight
distance (MGSD). The Stopping Sight Distance (SSD) requirements are outlined in the AUSTROADS Guide
to Road Design Part 3: Geometric Design. For an approach speed limit of 50km/h the AUSTROADS and
AS2890.1 for sight distance requirements are detailed in Table 10.
13
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is Sight
one Distance
of the documents
Table 10:
Requirements
Type of Sight Distance
Grade
Sight Distance
Requirement for
design speed
50km/h
Approach Sight Distance (ASD) desirable

minimum for a reaction time of 2 seconds
on most urban and rural road types
Level
55m
Safe Intersection Sight Distance (SISD) for

a reaction time of 2 seconds
Level
97m
69m
Level
55m
Requirements
AUSTROADS Guide Part

4A: Unsignalised and
Signalised Intersection.
Minimum Gap Sight Distance (MGSD)

assuming critical gap of 5 seconds
AUSTROADS Guide Part
3: Geometric Design
Stopping sight distance (SSD) on sealed

roads for a reaction time of 2 seconds on
most urban and rural road types
Photos of sight distances at the proposed and existing development access locations at New Town Road
and Risdon Road are provided in Appendix E.
Based on the development plans and site inspections, the sight distance from the proposed accesses
(entry and exit) off New Town Road has been examined. As part of the construction of the new access
the removal of the existing retaining walls / mesh fence fronting New Town Road and adjustments to the
pavement levels will be undertaken. With these modifications and the relocation of the bus stop, the
sight distances at the proposed New Town Road access driveways (entry and exit) are likely to exceed the
requirements of the AUSTROADS Guide and therefore are considered sufficient for the safe operation of
the accesses. The existing bus stop located immediately south of the southern access will need to
relocated to achieve this sight distance requirement. Refer to section 4.4 on the relocation of the bus
stop.
The sight distance to the east of the eastern and western access on Risdon Road is greater than 100m
which complies with all the requirements of the Austroads Guide. The sight distance to the west from
the eastern access is approximately 79.3m and from the western access the sight distance is 61.7m.
These sight distances comply with Austroads ASD, Austroads MGSD and Austroads SSD but do not comply
with Austroads SISD requirements. From both accesses the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster
Street signalised intersection is visible and therefore it is considered that motorists would be able to
detect gaps in the traffic from the signalised intersection. Thus the sight distance at the accesses is
considered sufficient for the safe operation of the accesses.
5.3
Traffic Operation / Traffic Analysis
5.3.1 Traffic Generation

The New South Wales Guide to Traffic Generating Developments is a widely recognised source for
indicative trip generation rates for various types of developments. The guide provides rates for a service
station and convenience store which closely match the proposed service station. Evening peak hour trip
generation rates for service stations and convenience stores are provided as follows.
14
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is one
the documents
Evening
Peakofhour
vehicle trips = 0.04 A(S) +0.3 A(F)
permit No. PLN-15-00181-01 and
was
2
A(S)
area
of site (m
)
received on
the
20 February
2015.
A(F) gross floor area of convenience store (m2)
The traffic generation for the service station development is outlined below. It has been assumed that
10% of the daily vehicle trips are peak hourly volumes.
Daily vehicle trips
Weekday average PM peak hour vehicle trips
720 vpd
72 vph
5.3.2 Traffic Assignment

Due to the location of the service station to the proposed accesses on New Town Road it has been
assumed (for the purpose of the traffic analysis) that the majority of the traffic generated by the service
station and associated convenience store will predominately use the proposed New Town Road accesses
to enter and exit the site. Based on this assumption, it has been assumed that 60% of the traffic
generated by the service station ingress and egress from the New Town Road accesses and 40% ingress
and egress from the Risdon Road accesses.
The traffic generated by the service station development has been assigned to the road network in the
same proportion as those in the traffic volumes on Risdon Road.
As the New Town Road access has a left in left out arrangement, 100% of the traffic generated by the
development egressing from the New Town Road access will travel towards the New Town Road Risdon
Road Forster Street intersection.
5.3.3 Traffic Operation

From the trip generation discussed in Section 5.3.1 and the traffic assignment discussed in Section 5.3.2,
the operation of the accesses and intersections within the vicinity of the proposed development have
been analysed using SIDRA software to determine the likely queues and delays resulting from operation
of the proposed development. The expected performance of these locations has been analysed in both
the estimated opening year (2015) and 10 years post-opening (2025). For the purpose of the analysis a
compound growth rate of 2% has been assumed for existing traffic volumes using each of the
intersections.
The following intersections have been assessed:
Eastern access on to Risdon Road
Northern and southern accesses on New Town Road
The traffic generated from the development is not likely to have any impact on the Risdon Road western
access in the AM Peak and PM Peak as this access is predominately used by the BWS bottle shop
customers.
Results of the SIDRA analysis for the current traffic conditions on New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster
Street, the Risdon Road access and New Town Road access are discussed in Section 3.7.2. Details of
traffic operation of these intersections and development accesses including traffic generated by the
service station development are discussed below. Detailed results are provided in Appendix F.
15
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is oneof
of New
the documents
Intersection
Town Road, Risdon Road and Forster Street
permit No.
waspeak and PM peak in 2015 (upon commencement of operation at the site)
ThePLN-15-00181-01
SIDRA results for and
the AM
received
on
the
20
February
2015.
and 2025 (post opening) are summarised in Table 11 to Table 12.
Planning
Authority:
City Risdon
Council
Table
11: New Hobart
Town Road
Road Forster Street Intersection AM Peak Period
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
57.8
0.572
93.2
Risdon Road
64.4
0.855
113.6
65.3
0.859
170.6
Forster Street
49.8
0.756
118.3
76.6
0.724
170.8
Risdon Road
202.1
1.083
291.1
177.7
1.082
466.4
Forster Street
87.9
0.951
244.7
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
Table 12: New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street Intersection PM Peak Period
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
67.4
0.856
90.4
Risdon Road
66.0
0.843
96.0
62.7
0.902
214.7
Forster Street
53.8
0.625
93.0
190.3
1.043
175.2
Risdon Road
169.4
1.058
37.1
155.7
1.061
72.3
Forster Street
76.6
0.901
26.3
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
In the opening year, there appears to be minimal difference when compared with the traffic analysis for
existing traffic conditions.
16
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is one of of
thethe
documents
The analysis
intersection in 2025 shows capacity issues at this intersection as the degree of
relevant tosaturation
the application
a planning
for a for
number
of movements (particularly the New Town Road north approach and right turn
permit No.movements
PLN-15-00181-01
and
was
at the Risdon Road approach and New Town Road south approach) increases to over 100%
(exceeding the 90% degree of saturation target for a signalised intersection). Significantly high queues of
up to 93 Hobart
vehiclesCity
(95%
back of queue length of 466.4m) are expected to occur on the through and left
Planning Authority:
Council
turn movements on the New Town Road north approach. With a traffic growth of 2%, the intersection
will not operate at the same level of service as it is currently operating. It must be noted that the poor
performance of the intersection in 2025 is predominately a result of the growth in traffic volumes on the
network and to a very minor extent the traffic generated by the proposed development. The detailed
SIDRA analysis output for 2025 for the intersection without the development is also provided in Appendix
F.
Eastern access on Risdon Road

The existing eastern access on Risdon Road has been analysed with SIDRA software. The SIDRA results for
the AM Peak and PM Peak is summarised in Table 13 and 14.
Table 13: Eastern access on Risdon Road AM Peak Period
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
11.8
0.185
1.3
Site Access
29.1
0.155
3.2
8.2
0.053
0.0
13
0.225
1.4
Site Access
53.6
0.287
5.9
8.2
0.064
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results

17
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
Table 14: Eastern access on Risdon Road PM Peak Period
Average Delay
20/7/2015
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
13.5
0.155
0.9
Site Access
33.3
0.317
7.3
8.2
0.068
0.0
16.1
0.189
1.3
Site Access
97.1
0.730
19.2
8.2
0.083
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
In the opening year (2015) and 10 year post opening year (2025) there appears to be minimal decreases
in operational efficiency at this resulting from the proposed development. For the AM peak and PM
peak, the longest delays are experienced by the left turn out and right turn out movements at the access.
The highest delay of 16 seconds on Risdon Road is on the east approach operating at a LoS C PM peak in
2025.
It can be seen that the impact from the traffic generated by the service station development is minimal
compared with the no development scenario.
New Town Road Access (Entry and Exit)

A summary of the SIDRA model outputs for the proposed New Town Road accesses (entry and exit) are
included in Tables 15 to 18.
Table 15: Eastern Access left OUT only AM Peak Period
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.1
0.479
0.0
Site Access
14
0.061
1.4
0.1
0.484
0.0
0.1
0.583
0.0
Site Access
18.1
0.095
2.1
0.1
0.588
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
18
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
This document
is one Access
of theleft
documents
Table 16: Eastern
OUT only PM Peak Period
Average Delay
20/7/2015
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.1
0.422
0.0
Site Access
16
0.057
1.3
0.1
0.547
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
Site Access
23.6
0.3
2.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.1
0.479
0.0
8.3
0.505
0.0
0.1
0.583
0.0
8.3
0.611
0.0
Average Delay
(worst
movement)
seconds
Level of Service
(Worst
Movement)
Degree of
Saturation
(Worst
Movement)
Queue Distance
(m)
0.1
0.422
0.0
8.3
0.569
0.0
0.1
0.512
0.0
8.3
0.688
0.0
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
Table 17: Eastern Access left IN only AM Peak Period
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
Table 18: Eastern Access left IN only PM Peak Period
Junction Approach
2015 SIDRA Results
2025 SIDRA Results
19
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This document
is one
theanalysis
documents
The results
of of
the
show that vehicles entering and exiting the development accesses will be able
relevantto
to do
theso
application
a planning
efficientlyforwithout
impacting on existing traffic on New Town Road. The SIDRA analysis results
permit No.
PLN-15-00181-01
and
was
indicate that left turn out movements from the development access is expected to operate at a LoS B
during the AM peak and LoS C during the PM Peak in 2015 with the highest delays of 1.4 seconds. In
the left
turn City
out movements
from the access are expected to operate at LoS C during the AM peak
Planning2025,
Authority:
Hobart
Council
and PM peak periods.
The north and south approaches to New Town Road are both operating at LoS A during the AM peak and
PM peak in 2015 and 2025 for both of the proposed entry and exit accesses.
Based on the SIDRA analysis for 2015 and 2025 the development accesses (entry and exit) are expected
to operate efficiently with acceptable queues and delays.
5.4
Parking
5.4.1 Parking Demand

The City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 does not provide any specific parking requirements for a service
station development of this nature and suggests that the parking provisions shall be determined by
Council.
Car parking rates for various types of developments are documented in the RTA Guide for Traffic
Generating Developments. The parking rates in the RTA Guide are equivalent to the parking rates in the
Hobart Draft Interim Planning Scheme 2014. Generally, the proposed development has been assessed
utilising the rates in the RTA Guide, where there is no provision within the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982.
The RTA Guide suggests a parking rate of 6 spaces per working bay plus 5 spaces per 100m 2 GFA of
convenience store. The proposed service station will solely be used for the fuelling of motor vehicles and
not additional use such as repairing and servicing of motor vehicles, washing or greasing, installation of
accessories, etc. Thus it is considered that parking for working bays at the proposed site is not required.
For a convenience store of 40m2 it is suggested to provide 2 car parking spaces. In addition to the two
parking spaces parking should be provided for staff.
AS2890.6:2009 Parking Facilities Off-street parking for people with disabilities requires the allocation of
two spaces for the total number of car spaces between 21-50 in the car park plus one car space for every
additional 50 car parking spaces. Thus 2 spaces are required to satisfy this requirement.
5.4.2 Parking Supply

The development plan indicates a total of 55 light vehicle parking spaces will be provided on site. Of the
55 spaces 33 spaces are designated for the use by the Maypole Tavern (which is currently provided on
site) including two spaces designated for the use by people with disabilities.
The total parking supply for the service station exceeds the estimated parking demand and there is
considered to be ample parking to accommodate the requirements of the proposed service station
development.
The additional 20 car spaces can be shared between the three uses on site.
20
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
5.4.3
Parkingfor
Design
relevant to
the application
a planning
permit No.The
PLN-15-00181-01
and was
parking arrangement
proposed for the development should be in accordance with AS2890.1 Parking
facilities Part 1: Off-street car parking. The Australian Standard outlines requirements for parking layout
at off-street car parks. As mentioned in Section 5.2, Table 1.1 of AS 2890.1 classifies off-street parking
facilities based on the likely duration and turnover of parking spaces. According to Table 1.1 the car park
used for the development site are considered to be User Class 3. Based on this User Class, the required
dimensions of the car parks, parking aisle and circulation lane widths can be determined from AS2890.1.
Based on the development plans the required dimensions for the individual components within the
proposed car park for the development are outlined in Table 19. The parking layout dimensions below
will allow safe movement of vehicles into and out of the provided parking spaces.
Table 19: AS2890.1 parking layout requirements
Car Parking Elements
Reference to AS2890.1
Standard
Minimum Required
dimensions for User
Class 3
Proposed Car Parking

dimensions
Parking space width
Figure 2.2 (90 degree

parking)
2.6m
2.6m
Parking space length

parking)
5.4m
5.4m
Parking aisle width

parking)
5.8m
5.5m-11m (varies)
Circulation Roadway
width (within car park)
Clause 2.5.2 Circulation

roadways or ramps
5.5m
5.5m or greater
Table 19 indicates that the parking space width, parking space length and circulation lanes comply with
the requirements outlined in AS2890.1 for user class 3. The car park proposed for the north of the site
adjacent to the convenience store has an aisle width of is 5.5m which is below the standard requirement
for aisle widths. There is sufficient space to shift the eight car parks further south approximately 300mm
to allow for the required aisle width without. All other aisle widths comply with AS2890.1.
For blind aisles, AS2890.1 requires a minimum of 1m clearance beyond the last car parking spaces unless
provision is made for cars to turn around at the end of the aisle. The development plans indicate that
there is a vehicle turning area at the end of the blind aisle and thus complies with AS2890.1.
Figure 2.3 of the AS2890.6, reproduced below, indicates that a car park for a person with a disability must
be 2.4m wide and 5.4m long and include a 2.4m wide adjacent shared area. The shared area should be
hatched and a bollard be placed approximately 800mm from the front of the area to prevent vehicles
from parking in it. It is recommended that the existing disabled car parks on-site be upgraded to comply
with AS2890.6.
21
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Figure 2.3 from AS2890.6
An assessment of turning movements have been undertaken (see Section 6) and confirms that the
parking layout is adequate to accommodate heavy vehicle movements in and out of car parking areas.
5.5
Road Safety
The additional traffic generated from the proposed development is not expected to increase the number
or severity of crashes on Risdon Road, New Town Road and the Risdon Road New Town Road Forster
Street intersection as the traffic volumes generated from the proposed development and speeds are
relatively low.
There is currently a safety issue associated with the New Town Road site access associated with emerging
vehicles colliding with traffic on New Town Road. The safety issues are likely to have been caused by
limited sight distance from the access and are likely to be eliminated with the new proposal to remove
the existing access and construct two new accesses (entry and exit) at the site. The proposed access
locations on New Town Road will have good sight distance on both directions. In addition the existing
retaining wall fronting New Town Road will be removed to improve sight distances from the proposed
accesses.
22
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant6.
to the application
a planning
Turningfor
Movement
Paths
received
the 20 February
2015.
Anonassessment
of heavy
vehicle turning movements into and from the site accesses and within the site
has been undertaken using AUTOTRACK software. The turning movement assessment is to determine
Planning
Authority:
City Council
whether
theHobart
surrounding
current and future local road network is adequate to facilitate vehicle
manoeuvres generated from the proposed service station. Turning manoeuvres at the development
accesses and within the development site have been analysed for 19m semi trailer vehicles (Petrol trucks)
which is the largest footprint of all vehicles accessing the site. Plans showing the turning movements are
shown in Appendix G. Heavy vehicles are to enter the site from the New Town Road access and exit the
site from the Risdon Road accesses. It is likely that all heavy vehicle movements out of the Risdon Road
access will be left turn manoeuvres only, however the right turn out has also been assessed as part of this
analysis.
The plans show the extent of the turning path to be the overhang of the vehicle. Based on the turning
movement plans the left turn movements out of Risdon Road western access appear to protrude onto
the existing kerb on the eastern side of the access. It is recommended that the geometry of the access be
modified to facilitate left turn heavy vehicle egress.
The plans show right turn manoeuvre out of the Risdon access appear to protrude over the central island
on Risdon Road. It is unlikely that heavy vehicles will turn right at this access, however if the heavy
vehicles do undertake this manoeuvre modification works are required to the central island.
The geometry of the entry access on New Town Road is sufficient to facilitate 19m semi trailer vehicle left
turn manoeuvres.
Within the site, the heavy vehicles exiting from the western access appear to protrude on to the central
island prior to reaching the access. It is recommended that all heavy vehicle traffic are restricted to turn
left at the Risdon Road western access or adjust the island within the site to facilitate turning trucks from
the eastern access.
7.
Summary of Findings
The proposed development has been assessed in terms of sight distance, access width, impact on the
operation of the road network and parking requirements. The Department of State Growths Framework
for Undertaking Traffic Impact Assessments has been referenced during assessment of the proposed
development.
The results of the assessment can be summarised as follows:
The traffic generated by the proposed development is not expected to increase the number or
severity of crashes on the surrounding road network as the traffic volume generated by the proposed
development and speeds are relatively low. It is recommended that a thorough review of the New
Town Road - Risdon Road Forster Street intersection phasing configuration and layout be
undertaken to review and identify any safety problems.
Based on the development plans, known access improvements and sight inspections, it is expected
that the sight distances at the proposed New Town Road access driveways (entry and exit) are likely
to exceed the requirements of the Austroads Guide and therefore are considered safe operation of
the accesses. The existing bus stop located immediately south of the southern access will need to
relocated to achieve this sight distance requirement. This matter is being considered by the
Department of State Growth as part of the overall Main Road Transit Corridor Project.
23
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
relevant to the
for atoplanning
Theapplication
sight distance
the east of the eastern and western access on Risdon Road is greater than 100m
and
which comply with thewas
requirements of the AS2890.1:2004 and the AUSTROADS. The sight distances
to the west from the Risdon Road accesses comply with all the requirements of the Austroads Guide
accept for
SISD.City
As Council
there is sufficient visibility of the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street
Planning Authority:
Hobart
signalised intersection from both of the Risdon Road accesses it is considered that motorists would be
able to detect gaps in the traffic from the signals. Thus the sight distance at the accesses is
considered sufficient for the safe operation of the accesses.
A total of 22 additional light vehicle parking spaces will be provided on the site for the service station.
There are two spaces designated for the use by people with disabilities. The total parking supply for
the service station exceeds the estimated parking demand and there is considered to be adequate
parking to accommodate the requirements of the proposed development.
A solid median on New Town Road and signage at the New Town Road access driveways is
recommended to discourage vehicles from turning right into the accesses
The parking space width, parking space length and circulation lanes within the site comply with the
requirements outlined in AS2890.1 for user class 3. It is recommended that the existing disabled car
parks on-site be upgraded to comply with AS2890.6. The car park proposed for the north of the site
adjacent to the convenience store has an aisle width of is 5.5m which is below the standard
requirement for aisle widths. There is sufficient space to shift the eight car parks further south
approximately 300mm to allow for the required aisle width without. All other aisle widths comply
with AS2890.1.
The existing disabled car parks on-site should be upgraded to comply with AS2890.6.
A turning movement analysis has been undertaken using AUTOTRACK software.
Left turn movements out of Risdon Road western access appear to protrude onto the existing
kerb on the eastern side of the access (see Appendix G in TIA). It is recommended that the
geometry of the access be modified to facilitate left turn heavy vehicle egress
Risdon access appears to protrude over the central island on Risdon Road. It is unlikely that heavy
vehicles will turn right at this access, however if the heavy vehicles do undertake this manoeuvre
modification works are required to the central island.
The geometry of the entry access on New Town Road is sufficient to facilitate 19m semi trailer
vehicle left turn manoeuvres.
Heavy vehicles exiting from the western access appear to protrude on to the central island prior
to reaching the access. It is recommended that all heavy vehicle traffic are restricted to turn left
at the Risdon Road western access or adjust the island within the site to facilitate turning trucks
from the eastern access.
The traffic generation associated with the proposed service station has been calculated, allocated to
the network and assessed using the SIDRA traffic modelling software. The traffic modelling has
indicated that the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street signalised intersection will be over
capacity with future traffic growth in 2025.
The traffic generated by the proposed service station is expected to result in minimal impact on the
current and future operations of the surrounding intersections. The future predicted capacity issues
related to the New Town Road Risdon Road Forster Street signalised intersection are
predominately due to future traffic growth on the network.
24
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
There
to documents
be minimal decreases in operational efficiency at the Risdon Road accesses resulting
This document
is appears
one of the
relevant to from
the application
for
the proposeda planning
development. The eastern access off Risdon Road operates efficiently in the
permit No. opening
PLN-15-00181-01
was
year withand
acceptable
delays and queues, however delays at the access approach are
expected to increase and experience a LoS F in 2025.
Planning
Hobartdevelopment
City Council is not expected to have a significant negative impact on road safety on
Authority:
The proposed
New Town Road and Risdon Road. These safety issues associated with the current New Town Road
access are likely to be eliminated with the new proposal to remove the existing access and construct
two new accesses (entry and exit) at the site.
25
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Appendix A
Crash History
Department of
CPC AgendaInfrastructure,
Energy and Resources
RIMS (Production)
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Collision Diagram
Report Details:
Request Id:
Requested by:
Date:
45982096
T WALLACE
04/11/2014 08:58:17
Parameters Used:
End Date:
Intersection Name:
Intersection Point
Radius (m):
Recipient Name:
Recipient Type:
Retired Road:
Start Date:
cdmr0060/1.4
04/11/2014
Risdon-Forster-New Town
<spatial value>
20
SJ
Engineer
Y
01/01/2009
Page 1 of 3
Department of
Collision Diagram
Crash Id
No. of
Fatalities
No. of Serious
Injuries
No. of Minor
Injuries
64219
113039
140306
145666
146663
223584
330383
369401
386243
30010619
30023096
30055969
30068190
30079854
30083745
30084370
30088649
30089917
30090146
30090415
30107455
30107456
30117208
30117484
30123011
30123209
30123493
30125052
30125054
30125124
30125197
30125230
30127028
30128441
30128481
30144392
30147515
30170526
30171821
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
PDO Flag
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
RIMS (Production)
20/7/2015 Engineer
SJ
DOCUMENT
Requested by: T WALLACE Date: 04/11/2014 08:58:17

Request Id: 45982096 End Date: 04/11/2014 Intersection Name: Risdon-Forster-New Town Intersection Point <spatial value>
(m): 20 Recipient Name: SJ Recipient Type: Engineer Retired Road: Y Start Date: 01/01/2009
Information contained in this document has been released in accordance with the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988, Section 14.
cdmr0060/1.4
Radius
Page 2 of 3
Department of
Collision Diagram
Collision Diagram
RIMS (Production)
20/7/2015 Engineer
SJ
DOCUMENT
Legend
*****End of Report*****
Requested by: T WALLACE Date: 04/11/2014 08:58:17

Request Id: 45982096 End Date: 04/11/2014 Intersection Name: Risdon-Forster-New Town Intersection Point <spatial value>
(m): 20 Recipient Name: SJ Recipient Type: Engineer Retired Road: Y Start Date: 01/01/2009
Information contained in this document has been released in accordance with the Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988, Section 14.
cdmr0060/1.4
Radius
Page 3 of 3
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Appendix B
Traffic Turning Movement Survey Data
to
to
to
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
to
to
8:00
8:15
to
7:45
8:30
to
7:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Classifications
Cars
Class 1
36
281
50
33
48
47
26
28
22
27
Trucks
Class 2
Direction 1
(Left Turn)
: 15 mins Data
18
300
50
37
50
48
28
33
24
30
14
953
106
97
131
123
122
131
135
108
23
Direction 8
(Through)
82
129
94
120
113
756
Direction 2
(Through)
84
85
49
38
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
Buses
Class 3
: Thursday, 6th November 2014
Day/Date
: Classified Intersection Count
: 1. Risdon Rd / New Town Rd / Forster St
Location
: Fine
: New Town
Suburb
Weather
: Pitt & Sherry
Client
Description
: T15
Job No.
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
30
35
1,018
113
101
136
133
132
142
146
115
244
20
20
34
62
46
29
19
14
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
168
793
New Town Rd
23
85
23
28
133
96
22
35
129
121
17
13
88
88
53
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
256
22
23
35
63
47
32
19
172
15
23
23
29
36
23
18
13
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
DOCUMENT
New Town Rd
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
Total
Total
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Forster St
215
21
36
43
37
29
21
11
17
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
182
3U
New Town Rd
9U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
28
25
28
23
14
11
20
33
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
223
23
37
43
39
31
22
11
464
37
47
91
74
65
57
56
37
Direction 11
(Through)
14
470
191
17
Risdon Rd
Direction 5
(Through)
31
41
76
90
94
59
46
33
34
29
25
31
24
16
11
21
Cars
Total
Buses
Buses
Total
6U
6
5
4
Cars
12
Risdon Rd
478
38
47
92
76
68
59
58
40
57
15
10
Direction 12
(Right Turn)
10
440
485
Forster St
49
59
62
54
48
79
50
39
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
32
43
78
92
95
63
47
35
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
1
Trucks
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Buses
2
Buses
60
15
10
452
49
62
63
54
48
83
52
41
Total
Total
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
0
Buses
10 11 12 12U
0
Total
0
Total
22
21
36
10
28
10
12
24
Crossing
Pedestrians
22
36
14
11
Total
200
11
26
54
51
28
14
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Location
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
7:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
16
36
20
18
21
15
281
178
154
149
123
103
Direction 1
(Left Turn)
: Hourly Summary
: Fine
Weather
Description
: New Town
Suburb
Day/Date
: Pitt & Sherry
Client
18
10
11
17
14
446
456
418
300
185
163
159
133
115
953
457
473
507
511
496
12
23
11
15
16
15
Direction 8
(Through)
402
756
338
38
21
18
21
16
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
Direction 2
(Through)
30
12
13
14
18
18
35
14
16
22
24
21
New Town Rd
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
: T15
DOCUMENT
Job No.
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
168
793
1,018
483
502
543
553
535
244
136
162
171
156
108
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
109
435
New Town Rd
102
108
471
479
59
87
358
426
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
172
256
143
168
177
161
111
113
0
0
106
111
90
61
Total
Total
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Forster St
68
182
215
137
145
130
98
78
114
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
3U
New Town Rd
9U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
90
76
104
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
72
14
470
191
223
142
150
135
103
464
249
277
287
252
215
238
119
Direction 11
(Through)
8
6
319
301
8
8
232
289
96
81
Risdon Rd
Direction 5
(Through)
109
82
Cars
Total
Buses
Buses
Total
6U
6
5
4
Cars
12
Risdon Rd
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
4
10
224
440
245
485
478
253
283
295
261
225
57
35
37
32
32
22
Direction 12
(Right Turn)
Forster St
243
223
328
308
6
4
216
231
240
297
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
2
Buses
0
0
0
227
228
452
60
37
38
32
32
248
23
0
0
224
237
Total
Total
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
0
Buses
10 11 12 12U
0
Total
0
Total
22
14
15
18
15
21
11
13
14
11
10
36
14
24
31
27
22
28
12
23
24
24
16
24
14
17
17
16
10
Crossing
Pedestrians
22
15
18
21
14
36
22
28
29
26
14
11
Total
200
99
142
159
147
101
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
: Fine
Weather
Description
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
16:45
17:00
17:15
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
15:45
to
to
to
to
to
16:15
16:30
16:45
17:00
17:15
Total
to
to
15:45
16:00
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
15:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
15:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Cars
Class 1
114
573
86
84
77
69
56
67
72
62
575
86
84
77
69
57
67
72
63
995
127
138
143
136
117
102
102
130
27
Direction 8
(Through)
839
114
112
106
121
103
97
84
107
109
19
11
17
14
17
16
Buses
13
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
13
19
11
17
14
17
16
Direction 1
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Direction 2
(Through)
: Wednesday, 5th November 2014
Day/Date
Class 3
Location
Class 2
: New Town
Suburb
Classifications
: Pitt & Sherry
Client
: 15 mins Data
: T15
Job No.
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
11
23
New Town Rd
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
30
48
37
39
42
308
122
111
114
113
106
875
New Town Rd
31
102
1,029
129
142
145
137
122
105
111
138
200
23
26
19
24
33
30
22
23
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
44
37
93
114
0
24
204
23
26
20
24
33
30
309
24
42
39
37
48
30
31
45
37
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
DOCUMENT
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
Total
Total
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Forster St
180
25
24
22
23
21
17
26
22
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
218
3U
New Town Rd
9U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
31
17
35
27
27
30
29
22
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
27
183
25
24
22
23
21
18
451
54
55
70
65
49
46
51
61
Direction 11
(Through)
558
218
23
Risdon Rd
Direction 5
(Through)
82
74
80
64
63
70
68
57
22
31
17
35
27
27
30
29
Cars
Total
Buses
Buses
Total
6U
6
5
4
Cars
Risdon Rd
462
56
55
71
65
50
48
52
65
60
15
Direction 12
(Right Turn)
416
565
Forster St
47
39
54
52
56
53
59
56
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
82
75
80
65
63
72
69
59
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
0
Trucks
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Buses
1
Buses
61
420
15
47
39
54
52
56
55
61
56
Total
Total
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
0
Buses
10 11 12 12U
0
Total
0
Total
14
33
10
27
23
17
Crossing
Pedestrians
15
19
28
13
Total
176
16
22
12
19
15
22
21
49
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
: New Town
Suburb
Location
Day/Date
to
16:30
16:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
Total
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
to
16:00
15:45
16:15
to
to
15:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
54
114
573
316
286
269
264
257
54
839
114
575
316
287
270
265
259
995
544
534
498
457
451
430
60
15
27
12
11
11
13
Direction 8
(Through)
409
431
436
61
59
64
448
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
60
61
59
64
Direction 1
(Left Turn)
: Hourly Summary
: Fine
Weather
Description
Direction 2
(Through)
: Pitt & Sherry
Client
: T15
Job No.
DOCUMENT
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
11
23
10
16
New Town Rd
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
308
875
1,029
553
546
509
475
476
200
92
102
106
109
108
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
166
444
New Town Rd
146
154
449
460
142
153
431
449
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
309
204
93
103
107
111
166
111
0
0
146
154
0
0
143
154
Total
Total
Buses
Buses
Cars
Cars
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
H
A
218
180
94
90
83
87
86
105
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
0
0
0
0
113
119
106
3U
New Town Rd
9U
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
110
New Town Rd
E
D
558
218
183
94
90
84
89
451
244
239
230
211
207
300
105
Direction 11
(Through)
2
2
277
281
106
110
4
3
258
265
113
119
89
Risdon Rd
Direction 5
(Through)
Total
Forster St
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Total
Buses
Buses
6U
6
5
4
Cars
Risdon Rd
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
0
3
192
416
302
565
462
247
241
234
215
215
60
27
29
28
25
33
Direction 12
(Right Turn)
Forster St
215
201
280
283
3
3
224
220
263
269
Total
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
Buses
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
1
Buses
0
0
0
201
192
420
61
27
29
28
26
217
34
0
0
228
224
Total
Total
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
0
Buses
10 11 12 12U
0
Total
0
Total
14
33
10
12
14
24
27
11
11
15
13
16
23
13
14
11
10
17
10
Crossing
Pedestrians
15
19
11
28
11
20
Total
176
69
68
68
77
107
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
: Fine
Day/Date
Weather
Description
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
7:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Classifications
Cars
Class 1
27
Trucks
Class 2
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
: 15 mins Data
Cars
28
34
179
199
210
237
184
150
1,403
1,441
187
141
223
225
160
189
178
138
30
Direction 8
(Through)
140
Direction 2
(Through)
104
Buses
Class 3
: 2. New Town Rd / Site Access
Total
: New Town
57
10
10
38
146
190
210
219
242
193
156
1,467
New Town Rd
111
New Town Rd
Total
Location
1,536
195
154
230
237
174
207
190
149
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Total
6
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
3
1
1
2
0
11
3U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
Cars
: Pitt & Sherry
Buses
Client
Trucks
11
Total
E
D
6U
6
Buses
9U
Site Access
Cars
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
New Town Rd
Total
6
Cars
0
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Trucks
Job No.
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
0
0
Total
0
Buses
DOCUMENT
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Total
Total
48
13
14
35
11
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
84
14
11
21
17
11
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site Access
: Fine
Day/Date
Weather
Description
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
7:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Cars
27
13
15
13
13
14
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
: Hourly Summary
28
14
15
13
13
14
Total
: New Town
17
14
17
17
34
728
825
830
781
1,403
1,441
776
749
797
752
665
30
12
17
22
20
18
Direction 8
(Through)
17
622
Direction 2
(Through)
57
25
27
27
31
32
38
15
19
24
25
23
765
861
864
810
1,467
New Town Rd
657
New Town Rd
Total
Location
1,536
816
795
848
808
720
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Total
6
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
7
7
4
11
3U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
Cars
: Pitt & Sherry
Buses
Client
Trucks
11
Total
E
D
6U
6
Buses
9U
Site Access
Cars
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
New Town Rd
Total
6
Cars
0
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Trucks
Job No.
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
Buses
DOCUMENT
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Total
Total
Total
0
48
15
25
38
40
33
35
18
25
25
19
17
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
84
33
50
63
60
51
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site Access
: Fine
Day/Date
Weather
Description
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
16:45
17:00
17:15
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
15:45
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
16:45
17:00
17:15
Total
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
15:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
15:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Classifications
Cars
Class 1
23
Trucks
Class 2
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
: 15 mins Data
Cars
23
13
158
195
195
181
176
191
1,455
1,747
235
242
229
243
188
208
207
195
28
Direction 8
(Through)
199
Direction 2
(Through)
160
Buses
Class 3
Total
: New Town
13
27
208
166
198
200
183
179
194
1,496
New Town Rd
168
New Town Rd
Total
Location
1,787
239
244
232
245
193
213
217
204
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Total
2
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
4
3U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
Cars
: Pitt & Sherry
Buses
Client
Trucks
Total
E
D
6U
6
Buses
9U
Site Access
Cars
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
New Town Rd
Total
2
Cars
0
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Trucks
Job No.
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
0
0
Total
0
Buses
DOCUMENT
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Total
Total
33
32
15
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
66
17
11
12
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site Access
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
Total
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
15:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Cars
23
15
12
Direction 7
(Left Turn)
: Hourly Summary
23
15
12
13
747
743
1,455
1,747
949
902
868
846
798
28
11
11
13
17
17
Direction 8
(Through)
729
Direction 2
(Through)
Description
11
: Fine
Weather
747
Day/Date
712
Total
: New Town
13
11
27
13
18
772
747
760
756
1,496
New Town Rd
740
New Town Rd
Total
Location
1,787
960
914
883
868
827
Direction 3
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Total
2
Direction 3U
(U Turn)
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
2
0
4
3U
New Town Rd
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
Cars
: Pitt & Sherry
Buses
Client
Trucks
Total
E
D
6U
6
Buses
9U
Site Access
Cars
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
New Town Rd
Total
2
Cars
0
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Trucks
Job No.
Trucks
Cars
Trucks
Buses
DOCUMENT
Buses
Trucks
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Total
Total
Total
0
33
15
19
19
19
18
32
23
24
13
13
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
66
38
43
33
33
28
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site Access
: 3. Risdon Rd / Site Access
Day/Date
to
to
to
8:45
9:00
9:15
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:15
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
8:15
8:00
7:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
to
to
8:00
8:15
to
7:45
8:30
to
7:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Cars
Class 1
Cars
Trucks
Class 2
Direction 7A
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Classifications
: 15 mins Data
: Fine
Total
Weather
Buses
52
10
Cars
Description
Buses
Class 3
: New Town
Location
Direction 7B
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Buses
: Pitt & Sherry
Site Access
54
10
Total
Client
10
Cars
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Total
10
Cars
0
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Risdon Rd
0
Total
: T15
Buses
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
7A 7B
26
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
6
2
30
117
119
1,086
27
882
111
101
165
144
107
100
88
66
146
Direction 11
(Through)
149
5
1
86
123
169
Direction 5
(Through)
177
Site Access
9U
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Job No.
Trucks
Total
DOCUMENT
Buses
Cars
Total
33
5
3
0
31
147
123
122
1,123
Risdon Rd
6
3
171
159
184
4
5
91
126
918
111
107
167
149
112
108
92
72
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Risdon Rd
Cars
Cars
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
Buses
Risdon Rd
Buses
Buses
Total
Total
Total
32
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
12U
0
Buses
10 11
0
Total
0
Total
18
Crossing
Pedestrians
11
Total
31
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
: New Town
Location
Day/Date
to
to
to
to
8:00
8:15
8:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
to
to
to
to
7:45
8:00
8:15
8:30
Total
to
7:30
9:30
9:15
9:00
8:45
8:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
7:45
Time Period
7:30
Cars
Direction 7A
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Direction
Buses
Approach
: Hourly Summary
: Fine
Weather
Total
Description
Cars
52
24
28
31
34
28
Direction 7B
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Site Access
54
26
29
32
34
28
Total
: Pitt & Sherry
10
Cars
Client
Buses
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
Total
10
Cars
0
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Risdon Rd
0
Total
Trucks
Direction 4
(Left Turn)
7A 7B
E
D
Site Access
9U
26
13
15
17
15
13
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
16
14
14
30
641
609
559
1,086
27
14
16
18
16
13
882
521
517
516
439
361
16
618
Direction 11
(Through)
16
527
Direction 5
(Through)
Total
: T15
Buses
Total
Cars
Cars
Job No.
Trucks
Buses
DOCUMENT
Buses
Cars
Cars
Trucks
Trucks
33
12
17
19
21
21
19
19
17
11
31
640
661
625
576
1,123
Risdon Rd
20
547
Risdon Rd
Total
Buses
918
534
535
536
461
384
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
Buses
Risdon Rd
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Total
32
12
18
19
19
20
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
12U
0
Buses
10 11
0
Total
0
Total
18
15
17
15
Crossing
Pedestrians
11
Total
31
16
22
24
21
15
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Day/Date
to
to
to
16:45
17:00
17:15
15:45
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
to
to
to
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
16:45
17:00
17:15
Total
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
16:15
16:00
15:45
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
to
16:00
16:15
to
15:45
16:30
to
to
15:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Cars
Class 1
33
Cars
Trucks
Class 2
Direction 7A
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Classifications
: 15 mins Data
: Fine
33
Total
Weather
Buses
21
Cars
Description
Buses
Class 3
: New Town
Location
Direction 7B
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Buses
: Pitt & Sherry
Site Access
21
Total
Client
16
Cars
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
Total
16
Cars
0
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Risdon Rd
0
Total
Job No.
Trucks
7A 7B
Site Access
9U
30
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
1
0
9
138
143
1,142
31
1,312
181
173
188
171
130
146
169
154
151
Direction 11
(Through)
136
2
2
141
160
147
Direction 5
(Through)
126
Direction 4
(Left Turn Pirie St)
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
DOCUMENT
Buses
Total
Total
Risdon Rd
4
0
4
24
151
139
143
1,153
Risdon Rd
3
3
148
139
127
3
5
143
163
Total
Cars
1,325
182
173
189
171
132
148
171
159
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
Buses
Risdon Rd
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
Total
24
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
12U
0
Buses
10 11
1
Total
0
Total
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
18
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
: New Town
Day/Date
to
to
to
to
16:00
16:15
16:30
16:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
to
to
to
to
15:45
16:00
16:15
16:30
Total
to
15:30
17:30
17:15
17:00
16:45
16:30
Time Period
Direction
Approach
Total
to
15:45
Time Period
15:30
Cars
33
21
16
15
15
12
Direction 7A
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Direction
Buses
Approach
: Hourly Summary
: Fine
Weather
33
21
16
15
15
12
Total
Description
21
11
10
10
Cars
Location
Direction 7B
(Left Turn)
Trucks
Suburb
Buses
: Pitt & Sherry
Site Access
21
11
10
10
Total
Client
16
10
12
13
Cars
Direction 9
(Right Turn)
Trucks
: T15
Buses
Total
16
10
12
13
Cars
0
Direction 9U
(U Turn)
Risdon Rd
0
Total
Job No.
Trucks
7A 7B
Site Access
9U
30
17
17
17
14
13
Direction 10
(Left Turn)
1,142
31
18
17
17
14
13
1,312
713
662
635
616
599
558
Direction 11
(Through)
4
2
7
6
584
569
560
Direction 5
(Through)
562
Direction 4
(Left Turn Pirie St)
Trucks
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
Buses
Cars
DOCUMENT
Buses
Total
Total
Risdon Rd
11
24
560
1,153
Risdon Rd
12
10
565
565
13
13
593
577
Total
Cars
1,325
715
665
640
622
610
Direction 6
(Right Turn)
Trucks
Trucks
Trucks
Buses
Risdon Rd
Buses
Buses
Cars
Total
13
Total
24
11
10
12
13
Direction 6U
(U Turn)
Direction 12U
(U Turn)
Trucks
0
Trucks
Cars
Cars
Buses
12U
0
Buses
10 11
1
Total
0
Total
Crossing
Pedestrians
Total
18
13
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Appendix C
SIDRA Model Outputs Base Case Model
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection AM Peak 2015
New Site
Created: Tuesday, 17 February 2015 5:24:50 PM

Copyright 2000-2013 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd
www.sidrasolutions.com
SIDRA INTERSECTION 6.0.15.4263
Project: J:\HOB\2014\551-600\HB14573\12P Technical Data\Traffic\Maypole Development SIDRA Analysis.sip6
8000168, PITT & SHERRY CONSULTING ENGINEERS, PLUS / Floating
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
to the application for
a planning
20/7/2015
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
Time = 110 seconds (Practical Cycle Time)
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Movement Performance - Vehicles
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
South: New Town Road (south approach)
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
23
0.0
0.572
49.9
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.93
0.81
26.6
22
T1
506
2.1
0.572
40.1
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.92
0.79
27.3
23
R2
115
4.6
0.501
57.8
LOS E
5.9
43.3
0.98
0.79
23.3
644
2.5
0.572
43.6
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.93
0.79
26.5
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
103
5.1
0.253
45.7
LOS D
4.6
33.4
0.86
0.77
26.7
25
T1
353
2.7
0.675
41.4
LOS D
14.6
104.6
0.95
0.79
26.9
26
R2
266
2.0
0.842
63.2
LOS E
15.5
110.3
1.00
0.94
21.9
722
2.8
0.842
50.0
LOS D
15.5
110.3
0.95
0.84
24.8
Approach
North: New Town Road (north approach)

27
L2
172
6.7
0.830
55.9
LOS E
21.8
158.5
1.00
0.96
24.3
28
T1
583
2.7
0.830
47.3
LOS D
21.8
158.5
0.99
0.95
24.8
29
R2
191
2.8
0.822
65.3
LOS E
11.1
79.2
1.00
0.92
21.5
945
3.5
0.830
52.5
LOS D
21.8
158.5
0.99
0.95
24.0
Approach
West: Forster Street
30
L2
145
2.2
0.349
47.0
LOS D
6.6
47.1
0.89
0.80
26.1
31
T1
317
2.7
0.756
45.0
LOS D
16.5
118.3
0.98
0.89
25.7
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
35
0.0
0.108
49.8
LOS D
1.6
11.1
0.88
0.73
25.3
497
2.3
0.756
45.9
LOS D
16.5
118.3
0.95
0.85
25.8
2808
2.8
0.842
48.7
LOS D
21.8
158.5
0.96
0.87
25.0
Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay (HCM 2000).

Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay per movement
Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.
SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay.
Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akelik M3D).
HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation.
Movement Performance - Pedestrians

Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec
Level of Average Back of Queue

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
49.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.95
0.95
P6
East Full Crossing
21
42.8
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.88
0.88
P7
North Full Crossing
21
45.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.91
0.91
P8
West Full Crossing
21
40.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.86
0.86
84
44.4
LOS E
0.90
0.90
All Pedestrians
Level of Service (LOS) Method: SIDRA Pedestrian LOS Method (Based on Average Delay)
Pedestrian movement LOS values are based on average delay per pedestrian movement.
Intersection LOS value for Pedestrians is based on average delay for all pedestrian movements.
Processed: Wednesday, 18 February 2015 9:35:37 AM

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
28
0.0
0.724
72.0
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.97
0.87
20.9
22
T1
617
2.0
0.724
58.7
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.95
0.84
22.1
23
R2
139
3.8
0.716
76.6
LOS E
9.9
71.9
0.99
0.84
19.4
784
2.3
0.724
62.4
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.96
0.84
21.5
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
126
4.2
0.309
59.7
LOS E
7.7
55.6
0.88
0.79
22.8
25
T1
429
2.5
1.061
151.7
LOS F
40.0
285.6
0.97
1.24
11.4
26
R2
325
1.6
1.071
193.0
LOS F
39.4
279.7
1.00
1.20
9.5
881
2.4
1.071
153.8
LOS F
40.0
285.6
0.97
1.16
11.4
Approach

27
L2
208
6.6
1.058
155.9
LOS F
59.5
431.7
1.00
1.33
11.5
28
T1
712
2.7
1.058
159.7
LOS F
59.5
431.7
1.00
1.38
10.9
29
R2
233
2.3
1.070
180.8
LOS F
27.3
195.2
1.00
1.20
10.0
1153
3.3
1.070
163.2
LOS F
59.5
431.7
1.00
1.33
10.8
Approach
30
L2
177
1.8
0.425
61.6
LOS E
11.1
78.7
0.91
0.81
22.2
31
T1
386
2.5
0.951
87.9
LOS F
34.2
244.7
1.00
1.13
17.1
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
42
0.0
0.103
57.9
LOS E
2.4
17.1
0.83
0.74
23.1
605
2.1
0.951
78.1
LOS E
34.2
244.7
0.96
1.01
18.7
3423
2.6
1.071
122.6
LOS F
59.5
431.7
0.97
1.12
13.5


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
60.8
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.90
0.90
P6
East Full Crossing
21
53.0
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.84
0.84
P7
North Full Crossing
21
57.3
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.87
0.87
P8
West Full Crossing
21
50.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.82
0.82
84
55.4
LOS E
0.86
0.86
All Pedestrians

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection PM Peak 2015
20/7/2015
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
65
0.0
0.522
43.3
LOS D
12.7
90.4
0.89
0.81
28.7
22
T1
477
2.6
0.522
34.8
LOS C
12.7
90.4
0.87
0.76
29.2
23
R2
179
2.4
0.856
67.4
LOS E
10.6
75.6
1.00
0.97
21.1
721
2.3
0.856
43.7
LOS D
12.7
90.4
0.91
0.82
26.6
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
114
0.0
0.269
45.8
LOS D
5.1
35.4
0.87
0.78
26.6
25
T1
325
2.3
0.621
40.8
LOS D
13.3
94.6
0.93
0.78
27.1
26
R2
206
2.0
0.827
64.9
LOS E
12.0
85.2
1.00
0.92
21.6
645
1.8
0.827
49.4
LOS D
13.3
94.6
0.94
0.82
25.0
Approach

27
L2
340
0.0
0.879
58.7
LOS E
28.5
200.1
1.00
0.99
23.2
28
T1
595
1.8
0.879
50.1
LOS D
28.5
200.1
0.99
1.02
24.0
29
R2
100
2.1
0.429
57.4
LOS E
5.1
36.5
0.97
0.78
23.3
1035
1.2
0.879
53.6
LOS D
28.5
200.1
0.99
0.98
23.7
Approach
30
L2
101
2.1
0.243
45.9
LOS D
4.5
31.8
0.86
0.78
26.5
31
T1
265
3.2
0.625
41.6
LOS D
12.9
93.0
0.95
0.80
26.8
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
29
0.0
0.116
53.8
LOS D
1.4
9.9
0.91
0.73
24.2
396
2.7
0.625
43.6
LOS D
12.9
93.0
0.93
0.79
26.5
2797
1.8
0.879
48.7
LOS D
28.5
200.1
0.95
0.88
25.1


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
49.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.95
0.95
P6
East Full Crossing
21
39.3
LOS D
0.1
0.1
0.85
0.85
P7
North Full Crossing
21
45.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.91
0.91
P8
West Full Crossing
21
36.9
LOS D
0.1
0.1
0.82
0.82
84
42.7
LOS E
0.88
0.88
All Pedestrians
Processed: Monday, 16 February 2015 2:03:00 PM

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection PM Peak 2025
20/7/2015
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
79
0.0
0.644
58.9
LOS E
23.8
169.2
0.92
0.85
23.8
22
T1
582
2.5
0.644
47.7
LOS D
23.8
169.2
0.89
0.79
24.9
23
R2
218
1.9
1.043
190.4
LOS F
24.6
175.2
1.00
1.19
9.7
879
2.2
1.043
84.1
LOS F
24.6
175.2
0.92
0.90
17.8
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
138
0.0
0.371
63.8
LOS E
8.7
61.2
0.91
0.80
21.9
25
T1
396
2.1
1.046
141.2
LOS F
35.8
254.9
0.97
1.21
12.1
26
R2
252
1.7
1.054
173.1
LOS F
28.7
203.9
1.00
1.17
10.4
785
1.6
1.054
137.9
LOS F
35.8
254.9
0.97
1.12
12.4
Approach

27
L2
414
0.0
1.020
126.0
LOS F
64.3
451.9
1.00
1.17
13.5
28
T1
724
1.7
1.020
125.5
LOS F
64.3
451.9
1.00
1.27
13.1
29
R2
122
1.7
0.384
67.6
LOS E
8.0
56.6
0.93
0.79
21.0
1260
1.2
1.020
120.1
LOS F
64.3
451.9
0.99
1.19
13.8
Approach
30
L2
123
1.7
0.336
63.7
LOS E
7.7
55.0
0.90
0.79
21.8
31
T1
324
2.9
0.901
76.6
LOS E
26.3
188.4
1.00
1.04
18.7
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
36
0.0
0.126
67.3
LOS E
2.3
15.9
0.90
0.74
21.0
483
2.4
0.901
72.6
LOS E
26.3
188.4
0.97
0.95
19.6
3407
1.7
1.054
108.2
LOS F
64.3
451.9
0.97
1.07
14.9


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
64.5
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.93
0.93
P6
East Full Crossing
21
46.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.79
0.79
P7
North Full Crossing
21
60.8
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.90
0.90
P8
West Full Crossing
21
44.1
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.77
0.77
84
54.0
LOS E
0.85
0.85
All Pedestrians

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: New Town Road Site Access AM Peak 2015
New Town Road Site Access SIDRA Analysis
Created: Wednesday, 18 February 2015 9:46:28 AM

20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
925
1.6
0.479
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
R2
0.0
0.011
15.8
LOS C
0.0
0.2
0.73
0.83
41.7
929
1.6
0.479
0.2
NA
0.0
0.2
0.00
0.00
59.7
Approach
East: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.158
53.9
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.93
0.98
24.1
R2
0.0
0.158
54.1
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.93
0.98
24.1
12
0.0
0.158
54.0
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.93
0.98
24.1
Approach

10
L2
11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
15
0.0
0.008
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.67
49.0
911
3.1
0.484
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
925
3.1
0.484
0.2
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.01
59.6
1866
2.3
0.484
0.5
NA
0.4
3.0
0.01
0.01
59.1

Minor Road Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all vehicle movements.
NA: Intersection LOS and Major Road Approach LOS values are Not Applicable for two-way sign control since the average delay is not a
good LOS measure due to zero delays associated with major road movements.

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
1127
1.3
0.583
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
R2
0.0
0.017
21.5
LOS C
0.1
0.4
0.83
0.95
37.6
1132
1.3
0.583
0.2
NA
0.1
0.4
0.00
0.00
59.6
Approach
East: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.576
283.0
LOS F
1.5
10.6
0.99
1.04
6.8
R2
0.0
0.576
283.2
LOS F
1.5
10.6
0.99
1.04
6.8
12
0.0
0.576
283.1
LOS F
1.5
10.6
0.99
1.04
6.8
Approach

10
L2
11
T1
18
0.0
0.010
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.67
49.0
1111
2.6
0.588
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
1128
2.5
0.588
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.01
59.6
All Vehicles
2272
1.9
0.588
1.7
NA
1.5
10.6
0.01
0.01
57.3


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road Site Access PM Peak 2015
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
813
0.3
0.417
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
R2
0.0
0.003
18.2
LOS C
0.0
0.1
0.78
0.80
39.9
814
0.3
0.417
0.1
NA
0.0
0.1
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
East: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.042
72.6
LOS F
0.1
0.8
0.95
0.99
19.9
R2
0.0
0.042
72.7
LOS F
0.1
0.8
0.95
0.99
19.9
0.0
0.042
72.7
LOS F
0.1
0.8
0.95
0.99
19.9
Approach

10
L2
17
0.0
0.009
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.67
49.0
11
T1
1032
0.2
0.538
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
1048
0.2
0.538
0.2
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.01
59.6
All Vehicles
1864
0.2
0.538
0.3
NA
0.1
0.8
0.00
0.01
59.6


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road Site Access PM Peak 2025
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
989
0.2
0.508
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
R2
0.0
0.006
27.8
LOS D
0.0
0.1
0.88
0.92
33.9
991
0.2
0.508
0.1
NA
0.0
0.1
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
East: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.180
289.3
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.99
1.00
6.7
R2
0.0
0.180
289.4
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.99
1.00
6.7
0.0
0.180
289.3
LOS F
0.4
3.0
0.99
1.00
6.7
Approach

10
L2
20
0.0
0.011
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.67
49.0
11
T1
1257
0.2
0.655
0.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.7
Approach
1277
0.2
0.655
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.01
59.5
All Vehicles
2269
0.2
0.655
0.5
NA
0.4
3.0
0.00
0.01
59.2


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access AM Peak 2014
Risdon Road Eastern Site Access SIDRA Analysis

20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
East: Risdon Road (east approach)
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
711
2.5
0.185
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
21
0.0
0.029
11.6
LOS B
0.1
0.7
0.53
0.76
45.4
732
2.4
0.185
0.4
NA
0.1
0.7
0.02
0.02
59.4
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.055
29.8
LOS D
0.2
1.1
0.83
0.91
32.9
R2
0.0
0.055
29.9
LOS D
0.2
1.1
0.83
0.91
32.9
0.0
0.055
29.9
LOS D
0.2
1.1
0.83
0.91
32.9
Approach
West: Risdon Road (west approach)

10
L2
20
10.5
0.052
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.19
57.5
11
T1
576
3.7
0.052
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.6
596
3.9
0.262
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
1336
3.1
0.262
0.5
NA
0.2
1.1
0.01
0.03
59.2
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
865
2.4
0.225
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
25
0.0
0.042
12.9
LOS B
0.1
1.0
0.59
0.82
44.2
891
2.4
0.225
0.4
NA
0.1
1.0
0.02
0.02
59.4
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
0.0
0.083
51.7
LOS F
0.2
1.6
0.92
0.97
24.7
R2
0.0
0.083
51.8
LOS F
0.2
1.6
0.92
0.97
24.7
0.0
0.083
51.7
LOS F
0.2
1.6
0.92
0.97
24.7
Approach

10
L2
24
8.7
0.064
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.19
57.5
11
T1
702
3.6
0.064
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.6
726
3.8
0.319
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
1623
3.0
0.319
0.6
NA
0.2
1.6
0.01
0.03
59.1
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access PM Peak 2015
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
602
0.3
0.155
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
13
0.0
0.023
13.3
LOS B
0.1
0.6
0.62
0.81
43.8
615
0.3
0.155
0.3
NA
0.1
0.6
0.01
0.02
59.5
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
22
0.0
0.173
26.1
LOS D
0.5
3.6
0.83
0.95
34.9
R2
11
0.0
0.173
26.2
LOS D
0.5
3.6
0.83
0.95
34.9
33
0.0
0.173
26.1
LOS D
0.5
3.6
0.83
0.95
34.9
Approach

10
L2
20
5.3
0.068
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.15
58.1
11
T1
768
0.1
0.068
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.6
788
0.3
0.338
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.6
1436
0.3
0.338
0.9
NA
0.5
3.6
0.02
0.04
58.6
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access PM Peak 2025
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
734
0.4
0.189
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
15
0.0
0.035
15.9
LOS C
0.1
0.8
0.72
0.91
41.7
748
0.4
0.189
0.3
NA
0.1
0.8
0.01
0.02
59.5
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
22
0.0
0.349
53.1
LOS F
1.0
7.3
0.93
1.02
24.3
R2
11
0.0
0.349
53.2
LOS F
1.0
7.3
0.93
1.02
24.3
33
0.0
0.349
53.1
LOS F
1.0
7.3
0.93
1.02
24.3
Approach

10
L2
24
8.7
0.082
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.15
58.1
11
T1
937
0.2
0.082
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.6
961
0.4
0.412
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.6
1742
0.4
0.412
1.3
NA
1.0
7.3
0.02
0.04
58.0
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: Risdon Road Western Site Access AM Peak 2015
Risdon Road Western Site Access SIDRA Analysis

20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
711
2.4
0.185
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
711
2.4
0.185
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
34
3.1
0.034
9.4
LOS A
0.1
0.9
0.36
0.65
47.4
34
3.1
0.034
9.4
LOS A
0.1
0.9
0.36
0.65
47.4
North: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
576
3.5
0.151
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
576
3.5
0.151
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
1320
2.9
0.185
0.3
NA
0.1
0.9
0.01
0.02
59.6


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
865
2.4
0.225
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
865
2.4
0.225
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
34
3.1
0.037
9.8
LOS A
0.1
0.9
0.40
0.67
47.2
34
3.1
0.037
9.8
LOS A
0.1
0.9
0.40
0.67
47.2
North: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
702
3.6
0.184
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
702
3.6
0.184
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
1601
3.0
0.225
0.2
NA
0.1
0.9
0.01
0.01
59.6


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Western Site Access PM Peak 2015
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
602
0.5
0.155
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
602
0.5
0.155
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
12
0.0
0.023
13.3
LOS B
0.1
0.5
0.63
0.82
43.9
12
0.0
0.023
13.3
LOS B
0.1
0.5
0.63
0.82
43.9
North: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
768
0.3
0.066
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
768
0.3
0.329
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
1382
0.4
0.329
0.1
NA
0.1
0.5
0.01
0.01
59.8


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Western Site Access PM Peak 2025
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
734
0.4
0.189
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
734
0.4
0.189
0.0
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
12
0.0
0.032
16.4
LOS C
0.1
0.7
0.74
0.91
41.3
12
0.0
0.032
16.4
LOS C
0.1
0.7
0.74
0.91
41.3
North: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
937
0.2
0.080
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
937
0.2
0.401
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
1682
0.3
0.401
0.2
NA
0.1
0.7
0.01
0.01
59.7


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Appendix D
Development Plans
Rev.
HAZ-1907
HAZ-1907-A01
HAZ-1907-A02
HAZ-1907-A03
HAZ-1907-L01
HAZ-1907-H01
LANDSCAPE PLAN
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
DRAWING LIST
DRAWING TITLE
DWG. No.
DOCUMENT
HAZ-1907
DRAWING No
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
DRAWING LIST
DRAWN
APPROVED
LPD
SCALE
DATE
ISSUE/AMT
NTS
BY
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
FINDELLA PTY LTD
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
N
O
D
R I S
DOCUMENT
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907- A01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
O N
D
S
R I
DOCUMENT
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:300 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907-A02
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
ABC
PETROL
ABC
BOUNDARY
PETROL
BOUNDARY
2700
ABC
PETROL
DOCUMENT
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:150 @A3
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
DATE
HAZ-1907- A03
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
BY
JS
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
BOUNDARY
5000
4800
BOUNDARY
DOCUMENT
SHOP
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3
T2
T5
T4
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
LPD
BY
LPD
HAZ-1907-L01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
LANSCAPE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
DIANELLA TASMANICA
0.5-2.0m WIDTH
0.5-2m HEIGHT
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA
0.1-1m WIDTH
0.5m HEIGHT
LEGEND
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
ROLL-OVER KERB
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
00
DN8
PIT
NEW SEWER
CONNECTION
RETAINING WALL
(2.0 - 2.5m HIGH)
FROM SERVICE
STATION AREA VIA
OIL INTERCEPTOR
OPEN DRAIN
TO EXISTING
OUTLET
DOCUMENT
EXISTING SEWER
EXISTING SEWER
G SEW
ER
EXIST
IN
RETAINING WALL
(2.0 - 2.5m HIGH)
OPEN DRAIN
NEW WATER METER

TO TAS WATER
REQUIREMENTS
PK
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
HAZ-1907- H01
APPROVED
MDC
DATE
DRAWING No
NORTH
DESIGNED
HAZ-1907
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
PRELIMINARY
BY
MDC
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
OPEN DRAIN
CAR PARKING
DN225 SW PIPE
EXISTING WATER CONNECTION

TO BE ABANDONED
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
EXISTING SW TO
BE ABANDONED
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Appendix E
Sight Distance Photos
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
Approximate location of New Town Road southern access
Approximate location of New Town Road northern access
pitt&sherry ref: HB14573H002 App E 31P Rev 00/SJ/bb
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
New Town Road North Access looking north
New Town Road North Access looking south
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
New Town Road South Access looking north
New Town Road South Access looking south
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
Risdon Road Eastern Access looking west
Risdon Road Eastern Access looking east
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
Risdon Road Western Access looking east
Risdon Road Western Access looking west
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Appendix F
SIDRA Model Outputs 2015 and 2025 Models
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection AM Peak 2015 with development
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
23
0.0
0.572
49.9
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.93
0.81
26.6
22
T1
506
2.1
0.572
40.1
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.92
0.79
27.3
23
R2
115
4.6
0.501
57.8
LOS E
5.9
43.3
0.98
0.79
23.3
644
2.5
0.572
43.6
LOS D
13.1
93.2
0.93
0.79
26.5
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
107
4.9
0.263
45.8
LOS D
4.8
34.8
0.86
0.77
26.6
25
T1
355
2.7
0.679
41.5
LOS D
14.7
105.4
0.95
0.80
26.9
26
R2
271
1.9
0.855
64.4
LOS E
16.0
113.6
1.00
0.95
21.7
733
2.7
0.855
50.6
LOS D
16.0
113.6
0.95
0.85
24.7
Approach

27
L2
183
6.3
0.859
58.9
LOS E
23.5
170.6
1.00
0.99
23.5
28
T1
595
2.7
0.859
50.2
LOS D
23.5
170.6
0.99
0.99
24.0
29
R2
191
2.8
0.822
65.3
LOS E
11.1
79.2
1.00
0.92
21.5
968
3.4
0.859
54.8
LOS D
23.5
170.6
0.99
0.98
23.4
Approach
30
L2
145
2.2
0.349
47.0
LOS D
6.6
47.1
0.89
0.80
26.1
31
T1
317
2.7
0.756
45.0
LOS D
16.5
118.3
0.98
0.89
25.7
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
35
0.0
0.108
49.8
LOS D
1.6
11.1
0.88
0.73
25.3
497
2.3
0.756
45.9
LOS D
16.5
118.3
0.95
0.85
25.8
2842
2.8
0.859
49.6
LOS D
23.5
170.6
0.96
0.88
24.8


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
49.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.95
0.95
P6
East Full Crossing
21
42.8
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.88
0.88
P7
North Full Crossing
21
45.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.91
0.91
P8
West Full Crossing
21
40.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.86
0.86
84
44.4
LOS E
0.90
0.90
All Pedestrians
Processed: Tuesday, 17 February 2015 9:56:17 AM

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection AM Peak 2025 with development
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
28
0.0
0.724
72.0
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.97
0.87
20.9
22
T1
617
2.0
0.724
58.7
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.95
0.84
22.1
23
R2
139
3.8
0.716
76.6
LOS E
9.9
71.9
0.99
0.84
19.4
784
2.3
0.724
62.4
LOS E
24.0
170.8
0.96
0.84
21.5
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
131
4.0
0.319
59.8
LOS E
7.9
57.6
0.88
0.79
22.8
25
T1
432
2.4
1.067
155.5
LOS F
40.7
291.1
0.97
1.25
11.2
26
R2
329
1.6
1.083
202.1
LOS F
41.0
291.0
1.00
1.22
9.1
892
2.4
1.083
158.7
LOS F
41.0
291.1
0.97
1.17
11.1
Approach

27
L2
220
6.2
1.082
174.2
LOS F
64.3
466.4
1.00
1.38
10.5
28
T1
723
2.6
1.082
177.7
LOS F
64.3
466.4
1.00
1.44
10.0
29
R2
233
2.3
1.071
181.9
LOS F
27.4
195.8
1.00
1.20
10.0
1176
3.2
1.082
177.9
LOS F
64.3
466.4
1.00
1.38
10.1
Approach
30
L2
177
1.8
0.425
61.6
LOS E
11.1
78.7
0.91
0.81
22.2
31
T1
386
2.5
0.951
87.9
LOS F
34.2
244.7
1.00
1.13
17.1
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
42
0.0
0.103
57.9
LOS E
2.4
17.1
0.83
0.74
23.1
605
2.1
0.951
78.1
LOS E
34.2
244.7
0.96
1.01
18.7
3457
2.6
1.083
129.3
LOS F
64.3
466.4
0.98
1.14
13.0


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
60.8
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.90
0.90
P6
East Full Crossing
21
53.0
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.84
0.84
P7
North Full Crossing
21
57.3
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.87
0.87
P8
West Full Crossing
21
50.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.82
0.82
84
55.4
LOS E
0.86
0.86
All Pedestrians

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection PM Peak 2015 with development
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
65
0.0
0.522
43.3
LOS D
12.7
90.4
0.89
0.81
28.7
22
T1
477
2.6
0.522
34.8
LOS C
12.7
90.4
0.87
0.76
29.2
23
R2
179
2.4
0.856
67.4
LOS E
10.6
75.6
1.00
0.97
21.1
721
2.3
0.856
43.7
LOS D
12.7
90.4
0.91
0.82
26.6
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
118
0.0
0.279
45.9
LOS D
5.3
36.8
0.87
0.78
26.6
25
T1
329
2.2
0.629
40.9
LOS D
13.5
96.0
0.94
0.78
27.1
26
R2
211
2.0
0.843
66.0
LOS E
12.4
88.1
1.00
0.94
21.3
658
1.8
0.843
49.8
LOS D
13.5
96.0
0.94
0.83
24.9
Approach

27
L2
352
0.0
0.902
62.7
LOS E
30.5
214.7
1.00
1.02
22.3
28
T1
606
1.7
0.902
54.1
LOS D
30.5
214.7
1.00
1.06
23.0
29
R2
100
2.1
0.429
57.4
LOS E
5.1
36.5
0.97
0.78
23.3
1058
1.2
0.902
57.2
LOS E
30.5
214.7
1.00
1.02
22.8
Approach
30
L2
101
2.1
0.243
45.9
LOS D
4.5
31.8
0.86
0.78
26.5
31
T1
265
3.2
0.625
41.6
LOS D
12.9
93.0
0.95
0.80
26.8
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
29
0.0
0.116
53.8
LOS D
1.4
9.9
0.91
0.73
24.2
396
2.7
0.625
43.6
LOS D
12.9
93.0
0.93
0.79
26.5
2833
1.8
0.902
50.2
LOS D
30.5
214.7
0.95
0.89
24.7


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
49.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.95
0.95
P6
East Full Crossing
21
39.3
LOS D
0.1
0.1
0.85
0.85
P7
North Full Crossing
21
45.5
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.91
0.91
P8
West Full Crossing
21
36.9
LOS D
0.1
0.1
0.82
0.82
84
42.7
LOS E
0.88
0.88
All Pedestrians

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road - Risdon Road - Forster Street Intersection PM Peak 2025 with development
New Site
- Fixed
Time City
Cycle
PlanningSignals
Authority:
Hobart
Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
21
L2
79
0.0
0.658
59.8
LOS E
24.1
171.3
0.93
0.86
23.6
22
T1
582
2.5
0.658
48.6
LOS D
24.1
171.3
0.90
0.80
24.6
23
R2
218
1.9
1.043
190.3
LOS F
24.6
175.2
1.00
1.19
9.7
879
2.2
1.043
84.8
LOS F
24.6
175.2
0.92
0.90
17.7
21.8
Approach
East: Risdon Road
24
L2
142
0.0
0.383
63.9
LOS E
9.0
63.2
0.91
0.80
25
T1
400
2.1
1.058
147.8
LOS F
37.1
264.5
0.97
1.23
11.6
26
R2
256
1.6
1.047
169.4
LOS F
28.8
204.3
1.00
1.16
10.6
798
1.6
1.058
139.8
LOS F
37.1
264.5
0.97
1.13
12.3
Approach

27
L2
425
0.0
1.061
155.7
LOS F
72.3
508.3
1.00
1.26
11.4
28
T1
736
1.7
1.061
154.9
LOS F
72.3
508.3
1.00
1.39
11.2
29
R2
122
1.7
0.384
67.6
LOS E
8.0
56.6
0.93
0.79
21.0
1283
1.1
1.061
146.9
LOS F
72.3
508.3
0.99
1.29
11.8
Approach
30
L2
123
1.7
0.336
63.7
LOS E
7.7
55.0
0.90
0.79
21.8
31
T1
324
2.9
0.901
76.6
LOS E
26.3
188.4
1.00
1.04
18.7
32
R2
Approach
All Vehicles
36
0.0
0.120
66.2
LOS E
2.2
15.7
0.89
0.74
21.2
483
2.4
0.901
72.6
LOS E
26.3
188.4
0.97
0.95
19.6
3443
1.7
1.061
118.9
LOS F
72.3
508.3
0.97
1.11
13.9


Mov
ID
Description
Demand
Flow
ped/h
Average
Delay
sec

Service Pedestrian
Distance
ped
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per ped
P5
South Full Crossing
21
64.5
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.93
0.93
P6
East Full Crossing
21
47.2
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.79
0.79
P7
North Full Crossing
21
60.8
LOS F
0.1
0.1
0.90
0.90
P8
West Full Crossing
21
44.9
LOS E
0.1
0.1
0.77
0.77
84
54.4
LOS E
0.85
0.85
All Pedestrians

CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access AM Peak 2015 with development
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
711
2.5
0.185
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
37
0.0
0.051
11.8
LOS B
0.2
1.3
0.54
0.79
45.2
747
2.4
0.185
0.6
NA
0.2
1.3
0.03
0.04
59.0
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
12
0.0
0.155
29.0
LOS D
0.5
3.2
0.83
0.94
33.3
R2
14
0.0
0.155
29.1
LOS D
0.5
3.2
0.83
0.94
33.3
25
0.0
0.155
29.1
LOS D
0.5
3.2
0.83
0.94
33.3
Approach

10
L2
28
7.4
0.053
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.26
56.4
11
T1
576
3.7
0.053
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
604
3.8
0.265
0.4
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
1377
3.0
0.265
1.0
NA
0.5
3.2
0.03
0.06
58.3
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access AM Peak 2025 with development
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
865
2.4
0.225
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
34
0.0
0.057
13.0
LOS B
0.2
1.4
0.60
0.84
44.1
899
2.3
0.225
0.5
NA
0.2
1.4
0.02
0.03
59.2
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
12
0.0
0.287
53.5
LOS F
0.8
5.9
0.92
1.00
24.2
R2
14
0.0
0.287
53.6
LOS F
0.8
5.9
0.92
1.00
24.2
25
0.0
0.287
53.5
LOS F
0.8
5.9
0.92
1.00
24.2
Approach

10
L2
33
6.5
0.064
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.24
56.6
11
T1
702
3.6
0.064
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
735
3.7
0.322
0.4
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.4
1659
2.9
0.322
1.3
NA
0.8
5.9
0.03
0.05
58.0
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access PM Peak 2015 with development
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
602
0.3
0.155
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
21
0.0
0.038
13.5
LOS B
0.1
0.9
0.63
0.84
43.6
623
0.3
0.155
0.5
NA
0.1
0.9
0.02
0.03
59.2
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
32
0.0
0.317
33.2
LOS D
1.0
7.3
0.87
1.00
31.3
R2
20
0.0
0.317
33.3
LOS D
1.0
7.3
0.87
1.00
31.3
52
0.0
0.317
33.2
LOS D
1.0
7.3
0.87
1.00
31.3
Approach

10
L2
28
3.7
0.068
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.20
57.3
11
T1
768
0.1
0.068
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
797
0.3
0.342
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
1472
0.3
0.342
1.5
NA
1.0
7.3
0.04
0.07
57.6
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: Risdon Road Eastern Site Access PM Peak 2025 with development
20/7/2015

/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
T1
734
0.4
0.189
0.0
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
60.0
R2
23
0.0
0.057
16.1
LOS C
0.2
1.3
0.73
0.92
41.4
757
0.4
0.189
0.5
NA
0.2
1.3
0.02
0.03
59.2
Approach
North: Site Access
7
L2
37
0.0
0.730
97.0
LOS F
2.7
19.2
0.97
1.15
16.3
R2
22
0.0
0.730
97.1
LOS F
2.7
19.2
0.97
1.15
16.3
59
0.0
0.730
97.0
LOS F
2.7
19.2
0.97
1.15
16.3
Approach

10
L2
33
6.5
0.083
8.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.19
57.5
11
T1
937
0.2
0.083
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
969
0.4
0.416
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.03
59.5
1785
0.4
0.730
3.6
NA
2.7
19.2
0.04
0.07
54.6
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left in only AM Peak 2015 with development
Created: Tuesday, 17 February 2015 8:44:11 AM

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
925
1.6
0.479
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
925
1.6
0.479
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9

10
L2
38
0.0
0.505
8.3
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
11
T1
911
3.1
0.505
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
948
3.0
0.505
0.4
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
1874
2.3
0.505
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.6
Approach
All Vehicles


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
1127
1.3
0.583
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
1127
1.3
0.583
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8

10
L2
41
0.0
0.611
8.3
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
11
T1
1111
2.6
0.611
0.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
Approach
1152
2.5
0.611
0.4
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
All Vehicles
2279
1.9
0.611
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.5


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left in only PM Peak 2015 with development
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
813
1.8
0.422
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
813
1.8
0.422
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9

10
L2
40
0.0
0.569
8.3
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
11
T1
1032
2.8
0.569
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
Approach
1072
2.7
0.569
0.4
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.3
All Vehicles
1884
2.3
0.569
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.5


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left in only PM Peak 2025 with development
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
989
1.5
0.512
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
989
1.5
0.512
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8

10
L2
43
0.0
0.688
8.3
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.2
11
T1
1257
2.3
0.688
0.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.2
Approach
1300
2.2
0.688
0.5
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.04
59.2
All Vehicles
2289
1.9
0.688
0.3
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.02
59.5


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
LAYOUT
relevantSITE
to the application
for a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left out only AM Peak 2015 with development
Created: Tuesday, 17 February 2015 8:33:23 AM

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
925
1.6
0.479
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
925
1.6
0.479
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
32
0.0
0.061
14.0
LOS B
0.2
1.4
0.70
0.90
43.3
32
0.0
0.061
14.0
LOS B
0.2
1.4
0.70
0.90
43.3
East: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
T1
Approach
All Vehicles
911
3.1
0.484
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
911
3.1
0.484
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
1867
2.3
0.484
0.3
NA
0.2
1.4
0.01
0.02
59.5


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
1127
1.3
0.583
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
1127
1.3
0.583
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
32
0.0
0.095
18.1
LOS C
0.3
2.1
0.81
0.94
40.0
32
0.0
0.095
18.1
LOS C
0.3
2.1
0.81
0.94
40.0
East: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
1111
2.6
0.588
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
T1
1111
2.6
0.588
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
All Vehicles
2269
1.9
0.588
0.4
NA
0.3
2.1
0.01
0.01
59.4


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left out only PM Peak 2015 with development
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
813
1.8
0.422
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
813
1.8
0.422
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.9
23
0.0
0.057
16.0
LOS C
0.2
1.3
0.76
0.92
41.6
23
0.0
0.057
16.0
LOS C
0.2
1.3
0.76
0.92
41.6
East: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
1032
2.8
0.547
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
Approach
T1
1032
2.8
0.547
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
All Vehicles
1867
2.3
0.547
0.3
NA
0.2
1.3
0.01
0.01
59.5


CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
SUMMARY
relevantMOVEMENT
a planning
Site: New Town Road proposed Site Access left out only PM Peak 2025 with development
/ Yield
(Two-Way)
PlanningGiveway
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
Mov
ID
OD
Mov
Demand Flows
Total
HV
veh/h
%
5
T1
Approach
Deg.
Satn
v/c
Average
Delay
sec
Level of
Service
95% Back of Queue

Vehicles
Distance
veh
m
Prop.
Queued
Effective
Stop Rate
per veh
Average
Speed
km/h
989
1.5
0.512
0.1
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
989
1.5
0.512
0.1
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.8
23
0.0
0.105
23.6
LOS C
0.3
2.2
0.88
0.96
36.3
23
0.0
0.105
23.6
LOS C
0.3
2.2
0.88
0.96
36.3
East: Site Access

7
L2
Approach

11
1257
2.3
0.664
0.2
LOS A
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.7
Approach
T1
1257
2.3
0.664
0.2
NA
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.00
59.7
All Vehicles
2269
1.9
0.664
0.4
NA
0.3
2.2
0.01
0.01
59.4


CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
Appendix G
Turning Movement Plans
DOCUMENT
A3
Ph. (03) 6223 1800

Fax. (03) 6223 1299
www.pittsh.com.au
PRELIMINARY
HOBART OFFICE
Hobart
Tasmania 7000
ABN 77 009 586 083
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
A3
Ph. (03) 6223 1800

Fax. (03) 6223 1299
www.pittsh.com.au
PRELIMINARY
HOBART OFFICE
Hobart
Tasmania 7000
ABN 77 009 586 083
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
A3
Ph. (03) 6223 1800

Fax. (03) 6223 1299
www.pittsh.com.au
PRELIMINARY
HOBART OFFICE
Hobart
Tasmania 7000
ABN 77 009 586 083
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
Contact
Shivani Jordan
(03) 6210 1402
sjordan@pittsh.com.au
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Brisbane
Level 2
276 Edward Street
Brisbane QLD 4000
T: (07) 3221 0080
F: (07) 3221 0083
Hobart
GPO Box 94
Hobart TAS 7001
T: (03) 6210 1400
F: (03) 6223 1299
Canberra
Tower A, Level 5
7 London Circuit
Canberra ACT 2601
T: (02) 6295 2100
F: (02) 6169 4100
Launceston
Level 4
113 Cimitiere Street
PO Box 1409
Launceston TAS 7250
T: (03) 6323 1900
F: (03) 6334 4651
Devonport
Level 1
35 Oldaker Street
PO Box 836
Devonport TAS 7310
T: (03) 6424 1641
F: (03) 6424 9215
Melbourne
Level 1, HWT Tower
40 City Road, Southbank VIC 3006
PO Box 259
South Melbourne VIC 3205
T: (03) 9682 5290
F: (03) 9682 5292
Sydney
Level 1
56 Clarence Street
Sydney NSW 2000
T: (02) 8216 4700
F: (02) 8216 4747
E: info@pittsh.com.au
W: www.pittsh.com.au
incorporated as
Pitt & Sherry (Operations) Pty Ltd
ABN 67 140 184 309
Rev.
DWG. No.
HAZ-1907
HAZ-1907-A01
HAZ-1907-A02
HAZ-1907-A03
HAZ-1907-L01
HAZ-1907-H01
LANDSCAPE PLAN
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
DRAWING LIST
DRAWING TITLE

DOCUMENT
HAZ-1907
DRAWING No
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
DRAWING LIST
DRAWN
APPROVED
LPD
SCALE
DATE
ISSUE/AMT
NTS
BY
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
FINDELLA PTY LTD
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
N
O
D
R I S
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907- A01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
PROPOSED SITE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL

DOCUMENT
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
CAR PARKING
CAR PARKING
O N
D
S
R I
R D
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
LEASE BOUNDARY
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3 T5
T2 T4
DESCRIPTION
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:300 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
BY
JS
LPD
LPD
LPD
HAZ-1907-A02
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
TANKER PATH LAYOUT
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT
0
1
2
3
CAR PARKING
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
ROLL-OVER KERB
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
MAYPOLE HOTEL

DOCUMENT
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FUEL
VENTS
SHOP
BOUNDARY
ABC
PETROL
ABC
PETROL
BOUNDARY
BOUNDARY
2700

ABC
PETROL
DOCUMENT
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:150 @A3
DRAWING No
APPROVED
JS
DATE
HAZ-1907- A03
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
CONCEPT ELEVATIONS
BY
JS
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
BOUNDARY
5000
4800
SHOP
POWERLINES
POWERLINES
T1
T6
1 x SINGLE AND
2 x SPLIT 55kL U/G
ENVIROTANKS
17kL U/G
LPG TANK
T3
T2
T5
T4
DRAWN
SCALE
ISSUE/AMT
1:200 @A3
DATE
DRAWING No
APPROVED
LPD
BY
LPD
HAZ-1907-L01
NORTH
DESIGNED
PK
HAZ-1907
LANSCAPE PLAN
PROJECT No
TITLE
CLIENT
TAS
NEW TOWN ROAD
MAYPOLE
PROJECT
HAZKEM
DIANELLA TASMANICA
0.5-2.0m WIDTH
0.5-2m HEIGHT
LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA
0.1-1m WIDTH
0.5m HEIGHT
LEGEND
ISS/AMT DESCRIPTION
0
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING
ROLL-OVER KERB
REMOTE FUEL
FILL POINTS
CANOPY OVER
ROLL-OVER KERB
LEASE BOUNDARY
CAR PARKING

DOCUMENT
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
PROPOSED
VEHICLE
ACCESS
10
Meters
15
20
Map ref
Revision
Author
Date
HB14573R3
A
mwalsh
16/03/2015
Data sources:
Base image by TASMAP (C) State of Tasmania
Base data from The LIST (C) State of Tasmania
Design from Kon Mantzis
Coordinate System: GDA 1994 MGA Zone 55

When Printed at A4
1:750
Cadastre
Design
Legend
<Double-click here to enter title>
EXISTING
VEHICLE
ACCESS
<a href=" http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/au/"><img

199/191 New This

Town
Road
Development
document
is one of
the documents

File: HB14573R3 12P RevA
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
E
DN300 SW PIP
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
SW
DN300 SW PIPE
SW
SW
SW
SW
PIT
PIT
PIT
SW
SW
SHOP
SW

SW
SW
SW
SW
EXISTING SEWER
S
EXISTING SEWER
SW
DN225 SW PIPE
SW
SW
DN225 SW PIPE
S
SW
DOCUMENT
SW
SW
SW
DN225 SW PIPE
S
S
DN2
25
SW
SW
PIPE
SW
SW
PIT
50
DN
1
OIL INTERCEPTOR PIT
SW
SW
A3
PI
PE
PIT
SW
SW
S
S
S
SW
SW
SW
SW
DN150 SW PIPE
S
Ph. (03) 6223 1800
Fax. (03) 6223 1299
www.pittsh.com.au
HOBART OFFICE
Hobart
Tasmania 7000
SW
SW
SW
SW
ER S
SW
SW
SW
PIT
PIT
OPEN DRAIN
PIT
PRELIMINARY
INGSW
SS EW
EXSIST
SW
PIT
SW
DN150 SW PIPE
S
S
S
S
S
ABN 67 140 184 309
SW
DN150 SW PIPE
SW
FILL POINT LOCATION
POWERLINES
OPEN DRAIN
PIT
SW
DN150 SW PIPE
R O A D
T O W N
N E W
HUMECEPTOR
GPT OR EQUIVALENT
SW
SW
PIT
SW
S
SW
S
SW
NEW MEDIA
FILTRATION AREA
SW
SW
TO EXISTING
OUTLET
SW
SW
SW
SW
S
S
S
SW
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

20/7/2015
6.

6.1

SCHEME 1982
6.1.5
1 BURNETT STREET, NORTH HOBART SIGN

PLN-15-00581-01 FILE REF: 1798691 & P/1/372
15xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
21 August 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00581-01
Address:
1 Burnett Street, North Hobart
Applicant:
Geoff Hawkins, 5 Elliott Road, Glenorchy
Proposal:
Sign
Representations:
Nil
Discretion:
Heritage, Sign
Executive Summary
It is proposed to erect an 8.5 metres x 2.5 metres poster panel sign on the southern
elevation of the building at 1 Burnett Street, North Hobart.
The proposed poster panel sign is not related to the use of the site (Rebels Motorcycle
Club, Hobart Chapter).
The proposal is discretionary in terms of signage and heritage.
No representations were received within the statutory advertising period.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372=
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site and location

The subject site is adjacent to offices and a warehouse, however it is in a predominantly
residential area. The site is directly opposite the Campbell Street Primary School and
within 60 metres of the Brooker Highway, North Hobart.
Zoning and Precinct
The site is zoned Residential 3 and is within Precinct 15A of the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982.
There is no specific Zone Objective for the Residential 3 Zone.
The Statement of Desired Future Character for Precinct 15A is as follows:
The Precinct should be rehabilitated as an inner city residential area with
particular emphasis on the protection and extension of the stock of low cost
housing. There should be minimal intrusion or further development of
nonresidential uses not necessary to serve local residents. Throughout the
Precinct, any modification or expansion of any existing non-residential use will not
be approved unless it can be demonstrated that it will neither displace nor adversely
affect any residential uses and will be compatible in scale and character with a
residential environment.
However existing educational establishments may be permitted to intensify or
expand provided the function and character of the Precinct is not compromised.
The future use and development of the property at 393 Argyle Street and
specifically defined within The Rydges Master Plan shall accord with the
provisions of that plan. Otherwise commercial and industrial uses should be
discouraged from expansion and encouraged to phase out to be replaced by infill
housing.
The environmental image of the Precinct should evolve from the rehabilitation of
its existing housing stock, together with new medium density housing
development compatible with the scale, form, height and siting of these
buildings.
It is considered that the placement of a large poster panel sign within Precinct 15A is at
odds with the Statement of Desired Future Character, as it is a nonresidential use not
necessary to serve local residents.
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
It is proposed to construct an 8.5 metres x 2.5 metres poster panel sign. The message will
change on a regular basis.
The applicant has advised that the reason that they wish to erect sign is to deter graffiti
artists using the wall for their art and therefore reduce the time and cost of repainting the
wall.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-2-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The poster panel will not be illuminated.

The applicant has advised that the message will not relate to the existing use of the site
and the applicant will not ...giving any support to anything that is inapt, eg smoking,
alcohol or sexual
Background
There is no background relevant to this application.
Discretion
Discretion
Proposed
Signage
Poster Panel signs are

discretionary within the
Residential 3 zone.
A poster panel sign.
Heritage
All development adjacent to a

place listed in Schedule F is
discretionary.
The subject site is

adjacent to 231
Campbell Street which
is listed under Schedule
F of the City of Hobart
Representations
Nil
Suggestions
Nil.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-3-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Consultation
The applicant has been contacted and advised that the application is to be considered by
the City Planning Committee and the Council, and that it has been recommended for
refusal.
Delegation
As the officers recommendation is for refusal, delegation rests with the Council.
Appraisal
i.
Use
The proposed poster panel sign is not ancillary to the use of the site (Club Rooms).
A poster panel is a discretionary sign within the Residential 3 Zone.
ii.
Signage
It is proposed to erect an 8.5 metres x 2.55 metres poster panel sign.

A poster panel sign is a discretionary sign in the Residential 3 Zone.
The sign does not meet the following sign standards for poster panel signs specified in
G.7.10 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982:
- Maximum length 6000mm.
- Maximum depth 3000mm.
- May be illuminated.
The sign has a length of 8500mm and therefore is required to be assessed against G.8 of
the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 which states:
G.8.1 A sign which does not meet the standards or definitions for signs within
this Schedule may be considered by the Council only in circumstances where it
would be unreasonable for the sign standards or definitions to apply.
And;
G.8.2 In assessing a sign in this category the Council shall take into consideration
those matters listed for the assessment of signs in Table C of the Zone
Requirements.
G.9.7 states:
A sign listed in Table C may be approved at the discretion of the Council if
it is considered suitable in that Zone.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-4-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
G.9.8 states:
In addition to the specific signs listed in Table C for each Zone, this group
also includes a sign which:
(i)
is to be placed on a building or site not having a P use status in
Table A of Schedule A and where the sign relates to that use, or
(ii)
is to be placed on a building or site in any use, or on vacant land,
and where the sign does not relate to that use,
(iii)
is an additional sign to a specified maximum exempt pursuant to
Section G.4 of this Schedule,
(iv)
is a sky sign on a building greater than 7500mm in height.
The proposed sign does not relate to the use of the site and therefore Clause G.9.8 (ii) of
the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 applies.
G.9.11 states:
In all cases a sign listed in Table C or other signs within this Group shall not be
approved if in the opinion of the Council:
(i)
the sign will dominate or obscure another sign to the detriment of that signs
effect or message;
The proposed poster panel sign is the sole sign on this elevation and will not
dominate or obscure any adjacent sign.
(ii)
the sign will lead to clutter of signage on the site or involve unnecessary
repetition of messages;
As stated above, the proposed sign is the sole sign on the southern elevation of the
building. The message will change on a regular basis. Consequently, it is
considered that the placement of the signs do not result in a clutter of signage on the
site or unnecessary repetition of messages.
(iii)
the sign will endanger of confuse traffic or cause confusion with navigation
aids to ships and aircraft;
The sign is not illuminated and so would not cause confusion with navigation aids to
ships and aircraft.
(iv)
the sign will lead to a significant reduction of sunlight into a window or

windows of an adjacent building;
The proposed sign is located on the southern elevation and only protrudes
approximately 6cm from the wall. The sign will be approximately 5 metres to the east
of a commercial property and together with the width of the sign, it is considered that
the sign will not have any impact on the amount of sunlight currently enjoyed by this
commercial property.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-5-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
(v)
20/7/2015
the proposed illumination, structure or size of the sign is of such

characteristics, or of such close proximity that it would significantly disturb the
amenity of an adjacent property and its occupants;
The sign is not illuminated and it is considered that there will be no impact on the
adjoining commercial property at 3 Burnett Street, North Hobart. However, it is
considered that the sign will disturb the amenity of the adjacent property at 231
Campbell Street (Campbell Street Primary). The proposed sign, being so large, will
be extremely visible from the playing oval and playground at Campbell Street Primary
School.
While the applicant has advised that the sign will not have certain messages, the
planning permit cannot be conditioned to this effect and may therefore affect the
amenity of the adjacent (opposite) property and occupants (predominantly children
aged 4-12 years).
(vi)
the attainment of the Desired Character of the Precinct in which it is locate will
be prejudiced;
The proposed poster panel sign is within the Precinct 15A of the Residential 3 Zone.
The Statement of Desired Future Character includes the following statement:
...There should be minimal intrusion or further development of nonresidential
uses not necessary to serve local residents. Throughout the Precinct,
any modification or expansion of any existing non-residential use will not be
approved unless it can be demonstrated that it will neither displace nor adversely
affect any residential uses and will be compatible in scale and character with a
residential environment.
Development is defined under the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 as
including:
(g)
the construction or putting up for display of signs or hoardings to be read from

off the site;
The erection of the site will contain messages not specifically necessary to serve
local residents. As stated above, the property is located in a residential zoned area.
The use of signage in residential areas, relating to commercial advertising should not
be encouraged nor is it an appropriate and necessary development in a residential
zone.
The site is currently used as clubrooms, which is not defined under the planning
scheme and was considered and approved as a discretionary use in the zone. While
the applicant has advised that the message contained upon the poster will not be
related to the use of the site, the proposed sign will at least will result in a
modification of the existing non-residential use of the land, which will adversely affect
the residential uses surrounding the site. In terms of compatibility, there are no
signs of the scale and character in the immediate area, and therefore the proposed
sign is completely at odds with the surrounding properties and their predominantly
residential use.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-6-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
(vii)
20/7/2015
the sign will deleteriously impact on the amenity and function of the Permitted
land uses within the Zone;
The sign will impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding residential uses, its
existence is not required and is out of context with when viewed against the permitted
land uses in the zone. In terms of the signs placement within a residential zone, it is
considered that it is out of character and will impact on any adjacent permitted uses.
(viii) the design and siting of the sign will be incompatible with
architectural, streetscape or landscape features of the site and the
vicinity.
There is one sign advertising the business being undertaken on the adjacent
property. This sign is located on the front facade of the building, which is setback
approximately 15m from the front boundary.
The design of the proposed sign, in terms of its size, placement and message not
related to the use of the site, is incompatible with the streetscape. As contained
within the Cultural Heritage Officers assessment, the sign will detract from the
architectural values of the site.
As stated above, with exception of the neighbouring property there are no signs
within the immediate area, including this section of Burnett Street. Consequently the
proposed sign does not meet G.9.11(viii)
Location of the proposed sign subject
to this application
Sign relating to the business
undertaken at the adjacent property
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-7-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
iii.
20/7/2015
Heritage
The site is adjacent to a heritage listed site (Campbell Street Primary School) and
therefore the application was referred to the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer who
provided a comprehensive assessment and concluded:
1 Burnett Street is one such adjacent previously-residential property that has been
severely compromised over the last century with incongruous additions to the
building and inappropriate modifications to its facade (including the removal of
windows and the front entrance plus the painting of the brickwork).
Whilst the application is being assessed under the previous scheme (City of Hobart
Planning Scheme 1982), under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, 1
Burnett Street will be part of the Heritage Precinct North Hobart Residential (Ref.
NH8) and, despite the changes that have been made, the residential qualities of the
building are still apparent through the form and detailing of its roof and eaves and
the visible parts of the original facade.
Along with the remaining residential properties, the mature trees and landscaping
along Burnett Street plus the nearby bushland of the Domain combine to provide a
visual balance to the busy roads that run alongside the school.
Much of the exterior of the building at 1 Burnett Street is painted now painted dark
grey. The neutral paint colour means that although badly disfigured, the building
forms a relatively neutral part of the setting of the listed place. The current absence
of signage along the Burnett Street frontage also enables its current non-residential
use to be somewhat disguised from the listed place.
Figure F. View of the wall taken from outside of the listed place
Figure E. Screenshot taken from Application showing the proposed sign.

Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-8-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Compared to other sections of Campbell Street and Burnett Street there are
relatively few examples of large signs surrounding the school and those that do
exist are set back from the street, much smaller in size than those proposed in the
current application and directly related to the occupants/business of each premises.
The proposed sign at 1 Burnett Street is very large and would face directly towards
the listed place. The sign would be clearly visible from the school grounds.
Further commercialisation of this adjacent previously-residential building with
advertising signage will degrade the setting of the listed place.
The proposed signage would be in conflict with Article 8 of The Burra Charter as
adopted on 23rd April, 1988 as it would present an environmental intrusion which
would adversely affect the appreciation and enjoyment of the listed place.
Conclusion
It is proposed to erect an 8.5 metres x 2.5 metres poster panel sign on the southern
elevation of the existing Rebel Motorcycle Club Rooms at 1 Burnett Street, North Hobart.
The applicant has advised that the reason that they wish to erect sign is to deter graffiti
artists using the wall for their art and therefore reduce the time and cost of repainting the
wall.
No representations were received within the statutory timeframe.
The proposal does not meet the Statement of Desired Future Character for Precinct 15A
and is not supported by the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer.
The proposal does not meet the signage standards nor performance criteria under
Schedule G of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 and is recommended for refusal.
Recommendation
That: A. Pursuant to Part 2 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982, the
Council refuse the application for a sign at 1 Burnett Street, North Hobart
for the following reasons:
1.
The proposed signage does not meet the signage standards

specified within clause G.7.10 of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme
1982.
2.
The proposal is contrary to clause G.9.11 (v) of the City of Hobart

Planning Scheme 1982, in that the size of the sign would significantly
disturb the amenity of adjacent properties and their occupants,
including those at 231 Campbell, North Hobart.
3.
The proposal is contrary to clause G.9.11 (vii) of the City of Hobart

Planning Scheme 1982, in that the sign will deleteriously impact on
the residential amenity and function of the Permitted land uses
within the Residential 3 Zone.
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
-9-
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
4.
The proposal is contrary to clause G.9.11(viii) of the City of Hobart

Planning Scheme 1982, in that the design and siting of the sign will
be incompatible with streetscape features of the site and the vicinity.
5.
The proposal is contrary to section 5.9.1 of the City of Hobart Planning

Scheme 1982 as it results in a non residential use not necessary to
serve local residents.
6.
The signage will have a deleterious effect on the cultural significance

of the listed place at 231 Campbell Street and is contrary to clause
G.12.1 (v) of the City of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982.
(Deanne Lang)
(Leanne Lassig)
Author: Deanne Lang
1 Burnett Street
- 10 -
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

1 Burnett Street, North Hobart
Description
Application Form
Title
Site Plan
Elevation plan showing
dimensions
Additional information re: type
of signage, attachment to wall,
message
Additional information
confirming that the message
contained on the proposed
signage will not relate to the
use of the site
Author: Deanne Lang
Drawing
Lot 3 on Sealed Plan 127839
Date of Lodgement
to Council
15 May 2015
15 May 2015
15 May 2015
15 May 2015
29 May 2015
19 June 2015
1 Burnett Street
- 11 -
File Ref: 1798691 P/1/372
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Scott, Diane
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
E Planning
Friday, 19 June 2015 8:28 AM
rfi information
FW: Signage at 1 Burnett st
Importance:
High
DOCUMENT
Raechel Roberts | Acting Senior Administrative Officer City Planning | City Government Unit
6238 2871
From: Maddison Blu [mailto:causinhavoc@hotmail.com]

Sent: Friday, 19 June 2015 7:55 AM
To: E Planning
Subject: Signage at 1 Burnett st
Importance: High
Good morning Deanne

As per our conversation , there will be no advertising of the community centre on the propposed signage
Kind regards
Geoff Hawkins
CPC Agenda
RECEIVIA)
INCIL
("r
110BAk
20/7/2015
29 MAY 2015
DOCUMENT
E-/1-e-c_ot.Ace-sc
4 0
NC-1
n
NIcv4-h
4-b)
_22
E
GIL_
C.-om
5r
Vtur
AniVIOZ-le
AAr)
LAIctU1 c r v 4 -
E?c(icA
we
kl C-3
e
idecl
\kk
aPPRoPoie.
3. Gqi
imorNen
t,
T+
6z_
resmtAcrl
(\ci
kNs kt
-1lin
\ik.
V\S-1Ii
O(cick
A SIC-1m
Lip.
k_s6 t NI -1
.\-\/14
cChl
P c k \ e . T . Ve
cve(o)kirAi,
stinal,
&tL
PtaQtAe
Me_SSAC-le_
(AN
u\1111
( -\A(\a\-
e,XUa_t_
6rNallete,
1Ni ft
a. (e,c 1,)ct
Qq
l c73
1.-,
Mbk
NI
-) 2
k.,
.L
t NI 6 , A Li c (-hct_ cr
Qe e l
/k7

20/7/2015
6.

6.2
APPLICATIONS UNDER THE BATTERY POINT PLANNING

SCHEME 1979
6.2.1
65 HAMPDEN ROAD, BATTERY POINT PARTIAL

CHANGE OF USE TO VISITOR ACCOMMODATION
PLN-14-00922-01 FILE REF: 5577001 & P/65-67/550
18xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
APPLICATION UNDER BATTERY POINT PLANNING SCHEME 1979
BPAC:
26 June 2015
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
Extension granted until 19 August 2015
Application No:
PLN-14-00922-01
Address:
65 Hampden Road, Battery Point
Applicant:
Ireneinc Planning obo Nicky McKibben, 49 Tasma Street,

North Hobart
Proposal:
Partial Change of Use to Visitor Accommodation
Representations:
Seventeen
Discretion:
Use, Heritage, Parking
Executive Summary
The Council received an application for a change of use from a private residence to visitor
accommodation at 65 Hampden Road, Battery Point.
Seventeen letters supporting the proposal were received during statutory advertising of the
application.
The proposal generates discretion under the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979
associated with use and heritage.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site and location
Zoning
The subject property is zoned Zone 1 Residential under the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979.
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
The proposal seeks approval for a change of use from a private residence to visitor
accommodation at 65 Hampden Road, Battery Point. There are two bedrooms in the
ground floor residence, allowing for a maximum of four guests.
No signage is proposed.
No internal or external works are proposed.
The applicant has advised that they envisage potential guests to be either short stay
couples or families who will be attracted to the location and charm of the apartment.
The visitor accommodation will be managed by the owner who lives in the unit above the
subject site.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-2-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Background
The application was submitted following action by the Councils Compliance and Permits
Unit regarding the use of the property for visitor accommodation without a planning permit.
Discretion
Discretion
Use
Heritage

Visitor accommodation is not
given a specific status within
Table 1 (Permitted and
Discretionary Uses in each
Zone) of the Battery Point
Planning Scheme 1979. Such
uses may only be approved by
the Council in its discretion under
Section 3.3c) of the Battery Point
Section E.2.2 of the Battery Point
Planning Scheme 1979 states:
The Council has the discretion
to refuse or permit any
proposed use and
development within or
adjacent to a place listed in
Table E.1 or registered by the
Tasmanian Heritage Council.
Section C.2(v) of the Battery
Point Planning Scheme 1979
requires one parking space per
bedroom for visitor
accommodation.
Parking
Proposed
Visitor Accommodation.
The property and several

adjacent properties are
listed in Table E.1 of the
Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979.
No on-site parking
currently exists and none
is proposed.
Representations
Seventeen (17) letters of support were received within the applications statutory
advertising period. The main issues raised were as follows:
(i)
Strategic issues:
I am puzzled by the apparent effort to keep tourism out of Battery Point. I
thought that Hobart City Council wanted to encourage the development of
tourism in a sustainable way, and small scale is surely sustainable.
(ii)
Several letters stated that there would be no negative impacts associated with the
proposed use.
(iii)
Advantages of self contained visitor accommodation:

The convenience and ambiance of self contained accommodation (such as Air
B&B and Stayz Tasmania) is what draws the tourist to our beautiful city...
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-3-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
...I strongly feel that visitors should have a variety of accommodation options
available to them. Visitors also want to live like a local and spend money in the
local community.
(iv) Matters relating directly to the site:
The house is a beautiful example of architecture of the turn of the 20th century
and would be a wonderful place to stay for any visitor who comes to Hobart
and wants a different experience from staying in a hotel;
I strongly support activities and use that enable continued enjoyment of
heritage buildings and also assist owners to offset the costs involved in
maintaining the heritage values of their properties.
I (the applicant) purchased the subject site 7 years ago and it was almost
uninhabitable and I have spent considerable amount on renovation. Previous
long term tenants damaged the property, neglected the garden and did not
pay rent on time. The alternative of short term accommodation has been of
benefit to the building, as it is now regularly maintained, heated, used and
cared for...
My property is the only one in a row of six that isnt commercial and is in a
section of Hampden Road where there are a number of businesses, including
retail, office, consulting rooms and restaurants. My business does not impact
negatively on the residents in the surrounding area.
(v)
There were several letters of support of the applicant and her experience in the
tourism industry
...The advantage of this proposal is that the applicant lives on site and has
extensive experience in the tourism industry and this knowledge would
enhance the visitors stay, both in Hobart and Battery Point.
(vi) One representation included a list detailing support by local property and business
owners, several of whom submitted individual representations, expressing their
support for the proposed visitor accommodation, and including comments such as:
As a local business owner I am very supportive of the existing Visitor
Accommodation at 65 Hampden Road, as the applicant always recommends
her guests to use local businesses.
(vii) In terms of parking, the issue was raised that:
...The applicant is entitled to 2 car parking spaces. If required the applicant
has advised that she may provide parking in Stowell Avenue, and;
Parking should not be an issue as this type of tourist may want to walk in the
area in order to gain a more personal experience of the historical (Battery
Point) and its surrounds.
It is true that, like our property, 65 Hampden Road has no off street parking
space however our experience is that longer term tenants are far more likely to
have cars which need parking while most short term visitors do not. Failure to
approve the change to visitor accommodation will result in a greater parking
problem in Battery Point, not an easing of parking.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-4-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
(viii) Many letters raised the fact that the subject site was in an area characterised by
commercial uses and therefore a fitting use in the area, and noted that the
application invites some discretion in the change of use.
...It is clear that visitor accommodation is a logical mix for the area and should
lend support in the use of discretion to approve the subject application.
Examples of existing retail/commercial uses in the immediate area include:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
61 Hampden Road Post Office

64 Hampden Road Antique Shop
69 And 76 Hampden Road Hairdresser
57 Hampden Road and 37 Waterloo Crescent Cafe
67 Hampden Road Pilates Studio
68 Hampden Road Gift Shop
70 Hampden Road Offices
71 Hampden Road Dental Practice
74 Hampden Road B&B
76 Hampden Road Hairdresser
81 Hampden Road Corner Store
(ix) Both adjoining neighbours are in support of the application and advised that
occupants of the short term visitor accommodation unit did not impact on their
residential amenity.
(x)
Several letters raised the issue that long term tenants do not maintain their property
to the standard that the applicant has at the subject property.
...I have found short term visitors much better to have than neighbours as
they seldom have cars taking up car spots for residents and make virtually
no noise compared to long term tenants.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-5-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Consultation
The applicant has been advised that visitor accommodation must be assessed under
Sections 3.1 and 3.5 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979.
The applicant has been contacted and advised that the application is to be considered by
the City Planning Committee and the Council, and that it has been recommended for
refusal.
Delegation
As the officers recommendation is for refusal, delegation rests with the Council.
Battery Point Advisory Committee
As the application is the subject of written representations from occupiers of nearby lots
(lots no more than 12 metres from the subject site) made during the applications statutory
advertising period, consideration by the Battery Point Advisory Committee is required
under Section 13.4c)(ii) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979.
The application was considered by the Battery Point Advisory Committee on 26 June
2015. An informal meeting of the advisory committee resolved that the application be
refused in accordance with the officers report.
Appraisal
i.
Scheme intent and Goals
Section 2.2 - The Intent of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 is:
To allow the traditional process of gradual residential evolution and intensification to
continue, without allowing new forms of development to become dominant. It
encourages the continued use of the existing buildings through renovation, additions
and conversion to self-contained flats, and it encourages the retention of existing
houses where new ones are built on available land. Demolition is to be controlled.
Redevelopment is to be at the present overall density, and in the form of single or
attached houses. The spread of commercial activities, and the construction of blocks
of apartments, is to be prevented. Uses which would not be compatible with the
maintenance of a predominately residential character are to be restricted to nonresidential zones.
The following goals under Section 2.3 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 are
applicable to this application:
(a)
Residential Amenity
To give the residential amenity the first priority in the development of
residential zones.
(f)
Non-Residential Development
To allow uses serving other localities and visitors to locate in specific areas
where residential amenity and character is not adversely affected.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-6-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
It is considered that visitor accommodation, although similar in some ways to residential

use, is non-residential, and commercial in nature, as it will not be used for long term
private and permanent residential occupancy. The proposal is therefore not consistent with
the intent or goals of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979.
ii.
Use class
The application is for a change of use from a private residence to visitor accommodation.
Visitor Accommodation is defined as:
accommodation whether or not self-contained, primarily intended for short-term
occupancy including motel, guest house, holiday units and the like, but excluding
Use Class 6 (Hotel Industry) and accommodation provided in Use Class 2
(Residential Business).
Section 3.1 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 states:
In considering an application for change of use, the Council shall have regard to the
following intentions of the zoning:
(a)
In the residential zone, to ensure that private residential use is given first
priority, whilst providing for uses which serve local residents or ensure the
retention of existing buildings incapable or unsuited to residential usage.
The property is located within Zone 1 Residential under the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979. From the letters of support it is apparent that the property has been used
as both a private residence and long term rental from 1957. It is therefore capable of and
suited to use for residential purposes. The proposed use is not a use likely to serve local
residents.
Subject to the provisions of the Scheme, development in a zone:
a)
may be carried out for uses indicated in that zone by the letter p in Table 1.
b)
shall not be carried out for uses indicated in that zone by the letter d in
Table 1 unless the Council in its discretion gives permission for that use
under Section 3.4;
c)
shall not be carried out for any other use except those approved by the
Council in its discretion under Section 3.5.
Visitor accommodation is neither permitted nor discretionary in the zone, meaning that the
application can only be approved under section 3.5 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme
1979.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-7-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

For the purposes of Section 3.3(c) the Council may:
(a)
permit an existing building to be used for any use in Use Classes 1 to 10 if

in its opinion all the following apply:
(i) continued beneficial use of the building is not feasible within the permitted
or discretionary uses for the zone.
(ii) the building contributes to the skyline or appearance or character of the
area or is of historical or architectural interest.
(iii) no substantial alterations or additions to the building are required or likely
to become necessary which obscure or damage it, and
(iv) no nuisance or detrimental effect is likely to be caused to nearby lots.
As stated above, the property has been used as a private residence and as a long term
rental since 1957. Consequently, it is evident that this private residential use, a permitted
use in the zone, is feasible and can continue indefinitely.
As part (i) of the abovementioned Section is not satisfied in this case, the Council does not
have the discretion to approve the proposed use under Section 3.5 of the Battery Point
Section 13.7(a) Variation of Requirements of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979
states:
In considering any application which does not comply with the Scheme, the Council
may in its discretion vary any provision of the Scheme but so as to maintain
conformity with the tenor of the scheme.
This section gives the Council the discretion to approve the development even though it
does not comply with Section 3.5, but only if it maintains conformity with the tenor of the
Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979. The tenor of the Battery Point Planning Scheme
1979 is defined under section 1.8 as:
The intent, goals and objectives as expressed in the Battery Point Planning Scheme
1979.
Section 2.2 states that the Intent of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 is as follows:
In residential zones, it is the intention of the planning scheme to allow the traditional
process of gradual residential evolution and intensification to continue, without
allowing new forms of development to become dominant ... it encourages the
retention of existing houses ... the spread of commercial activities is to be
prevented...
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-8-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposal is not considered to comply with the Intent of the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979, in that it displaces a residential use in a residential zone, and replaces it
with a commercial activity. The visitor accommodation is a residential-type activity, but it
has specifically been made neither permitted nor discretionary in the zone, and clearly
does not comply with Section 3.5. The Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, in both the
Intent and Section 3.5, maintains that residential zones should contain private residences,
that commercial activities should be resisted and the feasibility of the continued use of
buildings for permitted uses is a principle consideration in approving other uses. These
sections are consistent with the Principles of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979,
which states:
Over the past 150 years the Districts character has been developed in a consistent
way ... its topography and inaccessibility led to almost exclusively residential use ...
The Districts historic character has lasted precisely because it is still being used in
the same way: it can continue to perform the same functions, and its townscape and
future amenity both depend on these functions being protected.
Although the Council may exercise its discretion and approve the proposal under Section
13.7(a) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, because the proposal does not
comply with the tenor of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, it is not considered
appropriate to do so in this case.
Refusal of the application under Section 3.5 is consistent with previous decisions,
including 36 King Street (PLN-13-00017), 13-15 Bath Street (PLN-09-00560) and 10 Kelly
Street (PLN-13-00439), Battery Point.
iii.
Building in Zone 1 and Zone 2
Section 5.1 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 requires that:
In considering any application for building (which includes a change of use) in Zone
1 the Council shall have regard to the need to:
(a)
maintain and improve the existing housing stock,
(b)
ensure the survival of the existing form and pattern of buildings in the area,
(c)
ensure that, wherever possible, all new dwellings have a ground floor and
private garden,
(d)
fully protect the residential amenity of the area, and to allow only gradual
change which is in keeping with the character of the area,
(e)
protect the historic, aesthetic and townscape quality of the area and to retain
the diversity of building styles.
No building works, including renovation and demolition of the dwelling, are proposed as
part of this development.
As stated under Representations, there are a number of commercial businesses within
this section of Hampden Road, Battery Point. However, the properties either side of the
property contain residential uses.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
-9-
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
iv.
20/7/2015
Traffic
Section C.1 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 requires that:
Regard shall be had to the need to minimise the impact of traffic arising from
development;
and that:
All development shall be consistent with the tenor of the Scheme and unless the
Council otherwise approves, the following conditions shall be met:
Parking
(i) land directly between a dwelling and the street shall not be designed or
paved for the manoeuvring or parking of vehicles except to gain access to
the property;
(ii) the minimum dimension of any vehicle parking space required
under this Scheme unless otherwise determined or permitted by
the Council in any particular case shall be 5.5 metres by 2.7
metres if the space is within a building or covered or 5.0 metres by
2.5 metres if not within a building or not covered;
(iii) where three or more parking spaces are required, on-site turning
shall be provided and access ways and parking areas shall be
designed, sealed, drained and landscaped in accordance with a
plan to be submitted and approved by the Council;
(iv) where on-site turning is required between vehicle spaces, a
minimum aisle width of 7.0 metres shall be provided where a car
space length of 5.0 metres is required and 6.0 metres width where
a car space of 5.5 metres is required;
(v) vehicle parking spaces shall be provided as follows:
Use Class 5 (Visitor Accommodation): one space per
bedroom
(vi) the Council may relax the standards contained in (iii) above
where:
-
the location of an existing building on the lot makes the

provision of vehicle parking spaces impracticable or
undesirable; or
the full provision of vehicle parking spaces would occupy a

disproportionate part of the lot otherwise used for planting.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
- 10 -
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The subject site is a conjoined building which consists of three flats. The change of use
relates to the ground floor of 65 Hampden Road, Battery Point.
Section C.2(v) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 requires that each private
residence provide one on-site car parking space. The site does not provide any on-site car
parking and therefore the property is currently deficient by three car parking spaces.
Section C.2(v) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, in the case of visitor
accommodation, requires one car parking space per bedroom. The floor plan submitted
shows two bedrooms will be provided, requiring two carparking spaces to be provided for
the proposed use.
If approved, the remaining two flats and the visitor accommodation, would require four
spaces be provided in accordance with Section C.2 (v) of the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979 and, therefore, also on-site turning in accordance with Section C.2 (iii),
although Section C.2(vi) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 states that the
Council may relax the on-site turning requirement where:
-
the location of an existing building on the lot makes the provision of vehicle
parking spaces impracticable or undesirable; or
the full provision of vehicle parking spaces would occupy a disproportionate

part of the lot otherwise used for planting;
The applicant has advised that there is currently no on-site car parking spaces and that
there is no scope to provide any car parking on-site. The applicant has stated in their
supporting letter that the owner has negotiated with the proprietors of Montacute Boutique
Bunkhouse to allow the use of two car parking spaces if required.
Notwithstanding the above, it is considered the proposed change of use may result in less
traffic generated than a typical residential use. This consideration is due to the property
being unlikely to have a 100% occupancy rate, and it is presumed that any group would be
limited to one vehicle (when many permanent households have two). Further, it is
assumed that guests at 65 Hampden Road would largely utilise parking overnight and in
most cases there would be no conflict with short term parking in the area during traditional
hours of operation of the surrounding commercial uses.
If the proposal was recommended for approval, the use of discretion under Section C.2 (vi)
of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 would be supported in this instance.
v.
Signage
No signage is proposed as part of this application. If approved, advice would be placed on

the permit requiring the applicant to submit a further application.
vi.
Heritage
The property is Heritage Listed and therefore the application was referred to the Councils
Cultural Heritage Officer who provided the following report:
This property is listed in Table E.1 Places of Cultural Heritage Significance of the
Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979. The place is known as Pretoria.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
- 11 -
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The Heritage Schedule applies to use and development upon or adjacent to all
places of heritage significance identified in Table E.1.
The proposal is for a change of use to visitor accommodation and is a retrospective
application. No alterations or additions are part of this application.
The proposed use is in keeping and does not detract from the characteristics of the
place which contribute to its cultural significance. It is not considered contrary to the
Heritage Schedule of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979.
Conclusion
The proposed change of use from a private residence to visitor accommodation is contrary
to the intent of the Residential zone of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979. One letter
of support stated that the existing building had been used for residential purposes from
1957 and this use was continued until recently when the use of the flat was converted to
visitor accommodation without approval. This illustrates the flat is capable and suited to
continued residential usage.
The Council has consistently rejected applications for Visitor Accommodation in the Zone
1 Residential in Battery Point in the past.
Seventeen letters of support were received within the applications statutory timeframe.
Section 3.5 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 clearly states that any change of
use to visitor accommodation may only be approved if, inter alia, the continued beneficial
use of the building is not feasible within the permitted or discretionary uses within the
zone. In this instance, the building has been and can continue to be used as a dwelling,
which is a permitted use in the zone.
Therefore, the proposal does not meet Section 3.5(a)(i) of the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979.
Although the Council may exercise its discretion and approve the proposal under Section
13.7(a) of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, because the proposal does not
comply with the tenor of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 it is not considered
appropriate to do so in this case.
Consequently, the proposed change of use is not consistent with the relevant provisions of
the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979 and is recommended for refusal with reasons.
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
- 12 -
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Recommendation
That: A.
Pursuant to Part 13.5 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979, the
Council refuse the application for a partial change of use to visitor
accommodation at 65 Hampden Road, Battery Point for the reasons
outlined in the officers report and a refusal containing the following
reasons be issued:
1.
The proposed use is properly categorised as visitor accommodation

under the provisions of Section 3, Clause 3.2 of the Battery Point
Planning Scheme 1979, which is neither permitted nor discretionary
in Zone 1 Residential under Table 1 of the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979.
2. The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 3.5 of the Battery Point Planning Scheme
1979, and as a result it is inappropriate to exercise discretion in favour of the
proposal. In particular, the continued beneficial use of the building is feasible
within the permitted or discretionary uses for the zone.
3. The proposal is inconsistent with Clause 13.7 of the Battery Point Planning
Scheme 1979, and as a result it is inappropriate to exercise discretion in favour of
the proposal. In particular, the proposal does not maintain conformity with the
tenor of the Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979.
(Deanne Lang)
(Rohan Probert)
SENIOR STATUTORY PLANNER
Date of Report: 26 June 2015
Author: Deanne Lang
65 Hampden Road
- 13 -
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

65 Hampden Road, Battery Point
Description
Application Form
Title
Proposed Floor Plan
Covering Letter
Email re: sole access via front
entry
Author: Deanne Lang
Drawing
Lot 65 on Strata Plan 141058
Drawing No:A.04
65 Hampden Road
- 14 -
Date of Lodgement
to Council
13 May 2015
21 May 2015
13 May 2015
13 May 2015
28 May 2015
File Ref: 5577001 PP/65-67/550
Pr
oposed Vi
si
t
orAccommodat
i
on
Exi
st
i
ngGr
ound Fl
oorPl
an
65Hampden Road
Bat
t
er
yPoi
nt
,TAS

DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
12th May 2015
Hobart City Council

16 Elizabeth Street (GPO Box 503)
HOBART, TAS
7000
USE AS VISITOR ACCOMM ODATION PRET ORIA, 2/65 HA MPDEN ROAD, BAT TERY
POINT
Ireneinc planning has been engaged to prepare an application on behalf of the owner for a change of use
for the property Unit 2 / 65 Hampden Road, Battery Point. The application responds to an enforcement
letter (ENF-14-00922-01) dated 29th April 2015. This application seeks to change the use of the ground
floor of the property to Use Class 5 Visitor Accommodation:
Visitor Accommodation - accommodation whether or not self-contained, primarily

intended for short-term occupancy including motel, guest house, holiday units and the
like, but excluding Use Class 6 (Hotel Industry) and accommodation provided in Use
Class 2 (Residential Business).
The application seeks Councils discretion under clause 3.5 Existing Buildings, and Existing Uses in the
Battery Point Planning Scheme 1979. This clause provides Council with discretion to permit any use
within an existing building if in in its opinion the following considerations all apply. These considerations
are addressed below:
i.
continued beneficial use of the building is not feasible within the permitted or
discretionary uses for the zone
The property is located in Zone 1 Residential, and the following uses are permitted (P) or discretionary
(d) under Table 1 of the Scheme:
Use Class 1a - Private Residence (P)
Use Class 1b - Home Occupation (P)
Use Class 2 - Residential Business (d)
Use Class 3 - Local Service (d)
Use Class 4 - Multiple Accommodation (d)
There is no provision or capability for on-site car parking, restricting the feasibility of the use of the
property for Use Classes 1a, 1b, 2, & 3. The owner of the property has negotiated an arrangement with
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015

the proprietors of Montacute Boutique Bunkhouse allowing for the use of two car parking spaces if
required. Whilst suitable for short-term visitors, this is not viable as a daily, long-term arrangement for
ongoing long-term residents or staff. Use Class 4 is discretionary in the Zone, however as the ground floor
of the property includes a kitchen, bathroom, and toilet facilities it would be considered self-contained
by the Scheme, classifying any short term accommodation on the floor as Use Class 5.
ii.
the building contributes to the skyline or appearance or character of the area or is of

historical or architectural interest.
The property is listed in the Schemes Heritage Schedule E, and also on the Tasmania Heritage Register
(Place ID 1751). Significant effort and cost has been devoted to the restoration of the building in recent
times, which has contributed to the strengthening of the Districts historic character, as well as the
character of Hampden Road.
iii.
no substantial alterations or additions to the building are required or likely to

become necessary which obscure or damage it, and
The change of use involves no alterations or additions to the building.
iv.
no nuisance or detrimental effect is likely to be caused to nearby lots.
As observed in the enforcement letter, the property has previously been providing short term
accommodation. In the time doing so, much positive feedback was generated from surrounding residents
and businesses. In particular, it was noted that visitors were quiet, respectful, and friendly toward
surrounding neighbours, and that visitors were also more likely to provide custom to surrounding
businesses which increases the viability of the adjacent retail precinct and stimulates economic activity
in the area.
Figure 1: Zoning Plan (source: The LIST)
ireneinc PLANNING
Accommodation
2/65 Hampden Road Change of Use for Visitor
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
As seen in Figure 1, the site (orange outline) is located in Zone 1 Residential (pink) and borders Zone 2
Village Centre (orange). The surrounding properties (in the Village Centre zone, as well as the
Residential zone to the west) contain a range of non-residential uses including a Post office, hairdressers,
yoga studio, and offices. As such, any non-residential use of the property would not lead to a
fragmentation of the Scheme zoning, and would be in keeping with the character of the immediate
vicinity.
Please find accompanying this letter an application form, and floor plans showing the proposed change of
use for the ground floor. Should you have any further queries, please dont hesitate to contact me on
(03) 6234 9281, or at tim@ireneinc.com.au.
Yours faithfully
DOCUMENT
Tim Nichols
Graduate Planner
Planning Tas Pty Ltd
Trading as Ireneinc Planning
ireneinc PLANNING
Accommodation

2/65 Hampden Road Change of Use for Visitor

20/7/2015
6.

6.3

SCHEME 1997
6.3.1
63 SALAMANCA PLACE, BATTERY POINT NEW SIGN

PLN-15-00717-01 FILE REF: 5672316 & P/63/817
17xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
APPLICATION UNDER SULLIVANS COVE PLANNING SCHEME 1997
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
31 July 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00717-01
Address:
63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point
Applicant:
Hobart City Council, GPO Box 503, Hobart
Proposal:
New sign
Representations:
Nil
Discretion:
Heritage, Signage
Executive Summary
The site is the front wall of 63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point. The proposal is for a new
sign, taking the form of a bronze commemorative plaque. The dimensions would be
500mm wide by 320mm high, with the base of the sign mounted 0.890 of a metre above
footpath level. The sign would contain text commemorating the contributors to the success
of the Salamanca Market over the years.
Discretion is required in terms of heritage and signage under the Sullivans Cove Planning
Scheme 1997.
No representations have been received to the proposal.
Site and location
The site is in the Salamanca area of Sullivans Cove which contains remnant and historical
buildings that served the port of Hobart during the last two centuries.
Author: Richard Bacon
63 Salamanca Place
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
The site is the front wall of 63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point. The proposal is for a new
sign, taking the form of a bronze commemorative plaque. The dimensions would be
500mm wide by 320mm high, with the base of the sign mounted 0.890 of a metre above
footpath level. The sign would contain text commemorating the contributors to the success
of the Salamanca Market over the years.
Background
A previous application for the sign to be positioned on the side wall of 47-51 Salamanca
Place (Kennedy Lane) under DA 14-01312, was refused by Council on heritage grounds at
its meeting dated 15 December 2014.
Discretion
Discretion
Proposed
Heritage
The site is heritage listed under the

Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme
1997.
Signage discretionary under

Clause 22.4.5 of the Sullivans
Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
The Permitted option under Clause

22.4.4 of the Sullivans Cove
Planning Scheme 1997 requires a
Conservation Plan to be submitted,
otherwise discretionary.
Signage
The Permitted option under Clause

25.14 Table 25.1 of the Sullivans
Cove Planning Scheme 1997
requires a single wall sign per
building, otherwise discretionary.
Signage discretionary under

Alternative Performance
Criteria under Clause 25.14
Table 25.1 of the Sullivans
Representations
No representations have been received to the proposal.
Consultation
There has been ongoing consultation with the applicant.
Delegation
Delegation rests with the Council as the applicant is the Council.
63 Salamanca Place
-2-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Appraisal
i.
Heritage
The site is listed as a place of cultural significance and is adjacent to listed sites under
Table 1 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
The Tasmanian Heritage Council has issued a certificate of exemption for the proposal
(exemption no. 489) dated 29 April 2015.
Clause 22.4.4 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997 requires works to be in
accordance with a conservation plan for any heritage listed site. Such a plan has not been
provided. The proposal is therefore discretionary under Clause 22.4.5 of the Sullivans
Clause 22.4.5 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997 applies and states:
Building or works on places of cultural significance which cannot satisfy the deemed
to comply provisions of Clause 22.4.4 may be approved at the discretion of the
Planning Authority.
The following criteria must be taken into consideration in the assessment of all
proposals to undertake building or works on places of cultural significance:
Building or works must complement and contribute to the cultural

significance, character and appearance of the place and its setting;
Building or works must be in compliance with the conservation strategy of

an approved Conservation Plan, where required and/or provided;
The location, bulk and appearance of building or works must not

adversely affect the heritage values of any place of cultural significance;
Building or works must not reduce the apparent authenticity of places of

cultural significance by mimicking historic forms;
Building or works may be recognisable as new but must not be

individually prominent;
The painting of previously unpainted surfaces is discouraged.
The Councils cultural heritage officer comment is as follows:

The application for the above site seeks permission for the provision of a small brass
plaque dedicated to recognising the work of a former Alderman, commercial and
community groups in the establishment of the Salamanca Market. The plaque in question
would be placed onto an area of rendered stone block work to the front elevation of No.63
Salamanca Place.
The building forms part of the Salamanca Place commercial/retail frontage, stands within
the Sullivans Cove area of Hobart and is identified within Figure 5 Places of Cultural
Significance of Schedule 1 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997 (SCPS) and
surrounded by similarly listed places. The proposed signage must therefore be assessed
against Schedules 1 and 4 of the Plan.
63 Salamanca Place
-3-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
With regard to Heritage Issues, Schedule 1 requires;

22.2 Objectives
To provide an incentive for building works to be carried out in a manner which is
compatible with conservation of cultural heritage values.
With regard to signage, the stated objectives of Schedule 4 include;
25.2
To prevent visual clutter through the proliferation of signs by encouraging fewer

more effective signs.
To ensure sign on places of cultural significance are responsive to the cultural
heritage values and the significance of the building or place, both in terms of
impact and by means of attachment, by protecting and enhancing those values.
To prevent multiple signs on a single building, unless the cumulative effect of
existing and proposed signs will not adversely affect the character and/or cultural
heritage values of the building.
Section 25.11 which relates to signs on places of cultural significance goes on to state;
Fixtures must not damage historic building fabric, including but not restricted to
attachments to masonry and wood. All signs and related fittings are to be fixed
using appropriate non-corrosive fixings inserted in mortar joints.
When dealing with applications within a culturally significant area, there is clearly a fine
balance between allowing developments so that an area can continue to evolve and grow
as part of the active townscape, whilst also ensuring that in doing so, the intrinsic quality
sought by the users of the area is not lost in the process. At the same time, the Council
also has the responsibility of ensuring that buildings considered to be of particular Heritage
Value are individually protected, both physically, as in the fabric of the building; and
culturally.
Such a requirement can be complicated where an area also plays a role within the
townscape as a site for the provision of information and public information, and as such is
intended to act on behalf of a large number of stakeholders, including the landlord and
commercial occupiers seeking to widely communicate information the end user, that is the
general public.
In this instance, it is noted that the area of wall intended for the positioning of the plaque,
whilst already containing some small attached signage, is relatively free of such signage.
The proposed plaque would be relatively small and its bronze colour would allow it to sit
comfortably against the rendered block work. As such, it is considered that the proposal is
unlikely to constitute an over provision or proliferation and as such is unlikely to detract
from the overall character of the site. As such, it is considered that subject to a condition
requiring that the new fixings be non-corrosive, the proposed signage would comply with
the Heritage and Signage provisions of the Scheme.
63 Salamanca Place
-4-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Suggested Condition
The plaque approved by this permit shall only be attached using non-ferrous fixings.
To prevent non-reversible damage to stone/brick to ensure that the work complies with the
conservation principles, processes and practices set down in the Burra Charter, in
accordance with Schedules 1 and 4 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
The proposal is considered conditionally acceptable in terms of heritage provisions under
the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
ii.
Signage
Under Clause 25.6, definitions, within schedule 4 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme
1997, the proposed sign is considered to meet the definition of wall sign.
Clause 25.2, objectives, under the signage schedule of the Sullivans Cove Planning
Scheme 1997 states:
To maintain a balance between the established built form and historic

character of the Cove and commercial need to advertise goods and services.
To ensure that signs do not intrude into and detrimentally affect the visual
amenity of the area.
To ensure that signs are complementary to the overall character of Sullivans

Cove, and complement the historic character of the building on which they are
mounted.
To prevent visual clutter through the proliferation of signs by encouraging

fewer more effective signs.
To ensure that signs do not disrupt or compromise safety and efficiency of

vehicular or pedestrian movement.
To ensure signs on places of cultural significance are responsive to the

cultural heritage values and the significance of the building or place, both in
terms of impact and by means of attachment, by protecting and enhancing
those values.

existing and proposed signs will not adversely affect the character and/or
cultural heritage values of the building.
Under Clause 25.14 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997, the Wall Sign
acceptable solution requires:
A single sign per building.
Maximum vertical dimension 300mm.
Maximum horizontal dimension 2000mm.
63 Salamanca Place
-5-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The alternative performance criteria (discretionary) states:
Maximum vertical dimension 500mm or 5% of height of building wall,

whichever is greater.
Maximum horizontal dimension 4000mm.
The proposed new sign dimensions would be 500mm wide by 320mm high. The new sign
would meet the discretionary dimension.
There is existing wall signage on the frontage.
Clause 25.11, Signs of Places of Cultural Significance, of the Sullivans Cove Planning
Scheme 1997 states:
Notwithstanding any Acceptable Solutions or Alternative Performance Criteria
allowed for elsewhere in this Schedule, the following provisions apply to the erection
of any signs on, adjacent to or within a place of cultural significance (as listed in
Table 1 of Schedule 1 of this Scheme):
A sign on or adjacent to or within a place of cultural significance (as listed

in Table 1 of Schedule 1 of this planning scheme) is Discretionary.
A sign in the Cove area must not either by its size, design or content
detract from the character and heritage value of buildings both individually
and collectively including those groups or buildings comprising some
which may not be of particular heritage value.
For modern standardised trademark or propriety logo advertising,

corporate image requirements such as specific colours must be adapted to
suit the individual location and building.
A sign to be affixed to any place of cultural significance included in

Schedule 1 of the Planning Scheme must maintain or reinstate and not
detract from its original architecture, heritage value or character.
Signs must be placed to allow the architectural details of the building to

remain prominent.
Signs must be placed in locations on the building or item that would

traditionally have been used as advertising areas. Historical
documentation may be required to justify the placement of any new signs.
No signs shall dominate or obscure any other signs and in particular an

historic sign forming an integral part either of a buildings architectural
treatment of detailing, or its heritage.
Fixtures must not damage historic building fabric, including but not
restricted to attachments to masonry and wood. All signs and related
fittings are to be fixed using appropriate non-corrosive fixings inserted in
mortar joints.
Signs that break an historic parapet or roof line will be prohibited.
Use of side-walls to locate signs is prohibited if the wall does not form a
street-frontage, or has not historically been used for signs.
Internally lit signs and strings of light bulbs are prohibited.
63 Salamanca Place
-6-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Internally illuminated signs attached to a building of cultural significance

(excluding contemporary buildings and extensions on a place of cultural
significance that are not themselves of cultural significance) are prohibited.
Clause 25.13, matters to be considered, of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997
further states:
In addition to meeting the relevant Alternative Performance Criteria in Table 25.1 of
clause 25.14 of this Schedule, the following matters must be taken into account when
considering an application:
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the amenity of

the area including the need to avoid visual disorder or clutter of signs.
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the building

and/or surrounding area, considering its effect and means of attachment
on places of cultural significance.
The cumulative effect of the sign or signs on existing or approved signs,

including signs on buildings and outdoor uses that constitute a sign.
The size and likely impact of the sign having regard to the size of the
premises on which it is to be displayed and the scale of surrounding
buildings.
The effect of the sign on the safety and security of premises and the area.
The effect of the sign on the appearance, efficiency and safety of a road,
railway, waterway or other public way, having particular regard to the
signs colour, brightness and location.
The effect of the sign on pedestrian movement and safety.
Compliance with objectives of this Schedule.
Appraisal of the proposal with respect to Clause 25.13, matters to be considered, Sullivans
Cove Planning Scheme 1997 is as follows:
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the amenity of the
area including the need to avoid visual disorder or clutter of signs.
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the building and/or
surrounding area, considering its effect and means of attachment on places of
cultural significance.
The proposed wall sign would be positioned beneath three existing wall signs, resulting in
four similar signs on this part of the side wall of the building. The signs would be visible
from Salamanca Place, Battery Point, being positioned close to that end of the building
wall. Visibility from Kennedy Lane would be obstructed by freestanding informational
signage positioned adjacent in the lane. There is other scattered signage in the vicinity.
While the acceptable solution provides for a single sign per building, it is arguable that in
this case the signs are considered of small size, simple form and informational in content.
63 Salamanca Place
-7-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The site and adjacent sites are heritage listed. As stated, the Councils Cultural Heritage
Officer recommends conditional approval.

As previously stated, there is other scattered signage in the vicinity. While the Acceptable
Solution provides for a single sign per building, in this case the signs are considered of
small size, simple form and informational in content.
The size and likely impact of the sign having regard to the size of the premises
on which it is to be displayed and the scale of surrounding buildings.
The proposed sign would be of small size and simple form to be mounted on the side wall
of a substantial stone building. The proposed sign would not be visually dominant taking
into account the character and scale of immediate surroundings.
The signage is likely to have little effect on the safety and security of premises and the
area. The proposal is considered acceptable in this regard.
railway, waterway or other public way, having particular regard to the signs
colour, brightness and location.
While the proposal is for a second sign, it is considered likely to be unobtrusively sited, of
small size, simple form and informational in content.
In terms of compliance with Matters to be considered under Clause 25.13 of the Sullivans
Cove Planning Scheme 1997, the proposal is considered generally acceptable.
The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of signage provisions with regard to
heritage impact under the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
iii.
The Tasmanian Heritage Council has exempted the proposal (Certificate of Exemption No.
489 dated 29 April 2015).
Conclusion
The proposal is for a new sign on the front wall of 63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point.
The new wall sign would take the form of a bronze commemorative plaque, and would
contain text commemorating the contributors to the success of the Salamanca Market over
the years.
63 Salamanca Place
-8-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The Councils Cultural Heritage Officer recommends conditional approval.

The proposal is considered acceptable in terms of heritage provisions under the Sullivans
Approval is recommended.
Recommendation
That: A.
Pursuant to Part C of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997, the Council
approve the application for a new sign at 63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point
for the reasons outlined in the officers report and a permit containing the
following conditions be issued:
1.

2.
The plaque approved by this permit shall only be attached using nonferrous fixings.
To prevent non-reversible damage to stone/brick to ensure that
the work complies with the conservation principles, processes
and practices set down in the Burra Charter, in accordance with
Schedules 1 and 4 of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme
1997.
63 Salamanca Place
-9-
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

1.
Please consult your private building surveyor to ascertain whether the

proposal requires approval under the Building Act 2000. Where
approval is required this is to be obtained from the Council prior to the
installation of the signage.
(Richard Bacon)
(Leanne Lassig)
ACTINGSENIOR STATUTORY PLANNER
Date of Report:
Attachment B Tasmanian Heritage Councils Certificate of Exemption
No. 489, dated 29 April 2015.
63 Salamanca Place
- 10 -
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

63 Salamanca Place, Battery Point
Description
Application Form
Title
Site plan
Elevation (photograph with

dimensions)
Elevation (photograph)
Sign content
Documentation
Drawing
Project No: Drawing No: Revision No: Drawn by: Date of Drawing: Project No: Drawing No: Revision No: Drawn by: Date of Drawing: Project No: Drawing No: Revision No: Drawn by: Date of Drawing: Project No: Drawing No: Revision No: Drawn by: Date of Drawing: Sign details
63 Salamanca Place
- 11 -
Date of Lodgement
to Council
4/6/2015
12/6/2015
4/6/2015
4/6/2015
4/6/2015
4/6/2015
12/6/2015
File Ref: 5672316 P/63/817
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
Scott, Diane
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Rendall, Karyn
Friday, 12 June 2015 12:33 PM
rfi information
DA Application # PLN 15 00717 01
FolioText 127919 0.pdf; FolioPlan 127919 0.pdf
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
Please see below, additional information requested in your letter dated 9 June 2015 ref: 5672316 P/63/817
i.
Dimensions of plaque 500 x 320mm (in bronze)
ii.
Method of affixing The plaque will be mounted and fixed using small chemset anchors (or equivalent
type fixing) in such a manner as to ensure minimum risk of damage to the wall
iii.
Current copy of the certificate of property title see attached documents
As this is an internal application, the required $400 payment will be via Journal transfer from HC335.1382.1199.000.
Please contact me if further information is required.
Kind regards,
Karyn
City of Hobart
Karyn Rendall | Development Officer | Events & Salamanca Market
T: (03) 6238 2132 | F: (03) 6238 2124
Town Hall, Macquarie Street, Hobart Tasmania 7000 Australia | hobartcity.com.au

20/7/2015
6.

6.3

SCHEME 1997
6.3.2
SULLIVANS COVE VARIOUS LOCATIONS, HOBART

WAYFINDING SIGNAGE PLN-15-00665-01
FILE REF: 30-1-62
73xs
(Council)
Supporting documentation in respect to this item is available in the
Aldermens Lounge and on the Aldermens webpage.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
APPLICATION UNDER SULLIVANS COVE PLANNING SCHEME 1997
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
08 July 2015 (Extension of Time granted to 19 August 2015)
Application No:
PLN-15-00665-01
Address:
Sullivans Cove - various locations, Hobart
Applicant:
George Wilkie, GPO Box 503 Hobart 7001
Proposal:
Wayfinding Signage
Representations:
Nil
Discretion:
Heritage, Archaeology, Signs
Executive Summary
The proposal is for 27 pieces of wayfinding signage to be located around the area covered
by the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997. The signs are four different sizes, and all
provide information for tourists and locals alike about proximate facilities and points of
interest. Each sign is specific to its location.
The wayfinding strategy and its implementation have been endorsed by the Council.
The proposal invokes discretion with respect to heritage, archaeology and signs.
No representations to the proposal were received during the statutory advertising period
16 to 30 June 2015.
Author: Ben Ikin
Various Locations, Sullivans Cove
File Ref: S30-001-62
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Site and location

The proposal is for wayfinding signage at various locations within the area covered by the
Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997.
The map below shows the locations. Rather than reproduce the exact location of all 27
locations individually, this detail is provided in Attachment C.
Figure 1. Overview map of the 27 sign proposed sign locations.
CONSIDERATION
Proposal
The proposal is for 27 individual pieces of wayfinding signage.
The signage will provide information for tourists and locals alike about points of interests
and public amenities within proximity to each sign. Each sign is therefore responsive to its
particular location.
Author: Ben Ikin

-2-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The rationale for the signage is based on a wayfinding strategy which has been endorsed
by the Council (on 13 April 2015. Ref. Special Open EDCC 3, 13/4/2015, including
implementation), and responds to the 2010 Gehl report which provides that:
Wayfinding encompasses all of the ways in which people orient themselves in
physical space and navigate from place to place...Hobart city centre is in need of
signage and a wayfinding strategy. Hobart needs to develop a family of signs that
have been designed in a cohesive manner, focusing on the city centre and major
places of interest.
The wayfinding strategy proposes signage not only for the area covered by the Sullivans
Cove Planning Scheme 1997, but also for the city centre as well.
The signage will take one of four forms, identified as A, B, C or D type signs.
A-Type Sign: This is a 2.7m high by 0.9m wide sign, attached to the ground.
B-Type Sign: This is a 2.4m high by 0.6m wide, attached to the ground.
C-Type Sign: This is a 2.1m high by 0.3m wide sign, attached to the ground.
D-Type Sign: This is a 0.6m high by 0.3m wide sign to be attached to existing
infrastructure (wall or pole for example).
The sign types are shown in the table below.
A-Type
Author: Ben Ikin
B-Type
C-Type
D-Type

-3-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
A Type-A and Type-C sign were rolled out as part of a trial in early 2015, located on the
two river side corners of Brooke and Morrison Streets, as shown in the images below.
Fig. 2. Type-A sign
Fig. 3: Type- C sign
Background
The wayfinding strategy and implementation plan was endorsed by the Council on
13 April 2015. Ref. Special Open EDCC 3, 13/4/2015.
Discretion
The table below identifies the discretions invoked under the Sullivans Cove Planning
Scheme 1997.
Discretion
Proposed
Heritage
Development adjacent to a
heritage listed place is
discretionary.
All signs are adjacent to

heritage listed places.
(No signs are on a listed
place).
Author: Ben Ikin

-4-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Archaeology
Excavation of places identified as

being of archaeological sensitivity
is discretion.
The proposal includes

10 signs which require
excavation and which
are located on places
identified as being of
archaeological
sensitivity.
Signs
Interpretative signs (defined as

signs which provide information
for visitors, including plans,
historic information, location of
services, features and
businesses) are discretionary.
All signage is
categorised as
interpretative signage.
Representations
No representations to the application were received during the statutory advertising period
between 16 and 30 June 2015.
Delegation
The Council is the applicant to the development application and some of the signs are
located on Council owned land. As such no subordinate delegations are applicable and the
Council must determine the application.
Appraisal
Part B - Strategic Framework:
In consideration of an application Clause 10 requires the Council to consider the strategic
policies under Part A and B of the Planning Scheme, which are the basis for planning
controls within the Scheme. The proposal is considered to be consistent with these Parts,
in particular the following statements:
The spatial characteristics of the Cove are as important to the character of the Cove
as the buildings which frame these spaces. The future urban form of the Cove
should therefore respect these spaces. This applies to not only buildings but to new
works and urban detail (street furniture, road works, etc.).
The Cove currently has many excellent qualities which make it attractive to visitors
and residents. However, there are many aspects to the function and form of the Cove
which need to be addressed in order to enhance the pedestrian experience in the
Cove.
Pedestrian amenity in key areas within the Cove will also be addressed - protection
against air pollution, loss of sunlight, and wind, as well as provision of public
amenities, etc.
The successful preservation and interpretation of the Coves cultural heritage will
continue to make the Cove an attractive and interesting place to visit.
Author: Ben Ikin

-5-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Civic details are to be complementary to the existing different characters of the parts
of Sullivans Cove.
The aggregate number of signs in the Cove is to be kept to a minimum.
The promotion of pedestrian and cycle movement, amenity and safety is the primary
planning objective for movement within the Cove
The pavements, carriageways and parks of the Cove shall be improved to increase
pedestrian circulation and safety, enhance the pedestrians experience of the historic
character, reduce pedestrian/vehicular conflict, yet maintain vehicular access
(including parking and the movement of freight) to serve the diverse activities within
the Cove.
The Cove is to be promoted and developed as an attractive pedestrian environment.
The signs are considered to enhance pedestrian experience in the Cove by providing
relevant information and interpretation about proximate facilities and points of interest
essentially improving the functionality and useability of the Cove for pedestrians.
The design of the various sign types is considered to be respectful of the cultural heritage
values of the Cove and to be complementary to the spatial and urban form qualities of the
Cove.
Part D - Activity Area Controls
The signs are located within either Activity Area 2.0 Sullivans Cove Mixed Use or Activity
Area 4.3 Sullivans Cove Working Port.
The objectives and performance criteria for Activity Area 2.0 are set out in clause 16.2.
The proposal is considered to be consistent with them, in particular the following:
Objective
Comment
(a) To ensure that activities

within the Cove respect the
cultural heritage and
character of the Activity
Area.
All use and development

within the Activity Area must
demonstrably contribute to,
and enhance the cultural
heritage, built form (bulk,
height, volume, urban detail)
and spatial characteristics of
the activity area.
The design and form of the

proposed signs are
considered to enhance the
character and functionality of
the Cove.
(c) To encourage use and

development which generate
pedestrian movement
through the activity area.
All use and development

shall facilitate pedestrian
access, circulation, amenity
and safety within the Cove.
The proposed signage will

enhance the functionality
and useability of the Cove
for pedestrians.
Author: Ben Ikin

-6-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposal is considered to be consistent with the controls for Activity Area 2.0.
The objectives and performance criteria for Activity Area 4.3 are set out in clause 21.2.
The proposal is considered to be consistent with them, in particular the following:
Objective
Comment
(a) To protect and promote

public awareness of
Sullivans Cove as a unique
example of an historic
Australian waterfront.
New use and development

must demonstrate that it will
provide a positive
contribution to the character
and vitality of the Coves
historic waterfront environs.
The signage provides

information and
interpretation about the
Cove for locals and visitors
alike, displayed in a visually
appealing way.
(e) To ensure that the area

is further developed as an
attractive, comfortable and
interesting place for
pedestrians.
All use and development of

land must incorporate
features which enhance
pedestrian amenity, safety,
comfort and movement
across the Cove floor.
The proposed signage will

enhance the functionality
and useability of the Cove
for pedestrians.
(f) To ensure that

development in the area
respects the cultural
heritage and built form of the
Cove Floor.
All new development must

be sympathetic to the low
scale bulk and height
characteristics of the Cove
Floor.
The design and form of the

proposed signs are
considered to respect the
historic character of the
Cove.
The proposal is considered to be consistent with the controls for Activity Area 4.3.
Part E Schedules
Schedule 1 - Conservation of Cultural Heritage Values
All signage is adjacent to heritage listed places and 10 signs are on land identified as
being of archaeological sensitivity and require excavation (signs: W-C1, W-C9, W-C10, WB4,W-B5, W-B6, IC-B2, IC-B11, IC-C3, IC-C8 and IC-C10). As such the application was
referred to the Councils Senior Cultural Heritage Officer who commented as follows:
The proposed wayfinding sign panels are to be located at various sites, most of
which are adjacent to heritage-listed places within the Sullivans Cove planning area.
The Tasmanian Heritage Council has also reviewed the proposal, as some sites are
within an area registered on the Tasmanian Heritage Register. The THC has
exempted the proposal from the provisions of the Historic Cultural Heritage Act
1995.
Author: Ben Ikin

-7-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
In relation to the heritage provisions of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997,
the proposed signage will have little direct adverse impact upon heritage values of
individual adjacent listed places.
The archaeological impact of the proposed sign structures is also considered
acceptable.
The sign proposal responds to the key strategic framework of the planning scheme,
and the need to assist circulation and movement through the planning area.
The officers comments are generally supported. It is reiterated that the Tasmanian
Heritage Council has exempted the proposal.
Schedule 4 - Signs
The proposal is for 27 individual wayfinding signs that information for tourists and locals
alike about points of interests and public amenities within proximity to each sign. This type
of signage is categorised as an interpretative sign under this Schedule.
Interpretive signs are discretionary, and must be assessed against the following:
(i)
Must be capable of forming an integral part of the streetscape without

appearing dominant.
(ii)
Must not detract from the cultural or architectural significance or amenity of a

place or building.
(iii)
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the amenity of the
area including the need to avoid visual disorder or clutter of signs.
(iv)
The individual or cumulative effect of the sign or signs on the building and/or
surrounding area, considering its effect and means of attachment on places of
cultural significance.
Author: Ben Ikin

-8-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
(v)

(vi)
The size and likely impact of the sign having regard to the size of the premises
on which it is to be displayed and the scale of surrounding buildings.
(vii)
(viii)
railway, waterway or other public way, having particular regard to the signs
colour, brightness and location.
(ix)
The effect of the sign on pedestrian movement and safety.
(x)
Compliance with objectives of this Schedule.
The objectives provide:

(i)
To maintain a balance between the established built form and historic

character of the Cove and commercial need to advertise goods and services.
(ii)
To ensure that signs do not intrude into and detrimentally affect the visual
amenity of the area.
(iii)
To ensure that signs are complementary to the overall character of Sullivans

Cove, and complement the historic character of the building on which they are
mounted.
(iv)
To prevent visual clutter through the proliferation of signs by encouraging

fewer more effective signs.
(v)
To ensure that signs do not disrupt or compromise safety and efficiency of

vehicular or pedestrian movement.
(vi)
To ensure signs on places of cultural significance are responsive to the

cultural
(vii)
heritage values and the significance of the building or place, both in terms of
impact and by means of attachment, by protecting and enhancing those
values.
(viii)

existing and proposed signs will not adversely affect the character and/or
The design, form, scale and size of the signage ensure that it will not dominate the
streetscape. The signage does not amount to clutter, but rather will be complementary to
the overall character of the Cove while at the same time improving its functionality and
useability.
It is noted that the signage has the support of the Councils Senior Cultural Heritage
Officer.
Author: Ben Ikin

-9-
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The proposal is considered to be consistent with this Schedule.

Schedule 5 - Traffic, Access and Parking
The proposal is considered not to jeopardise pedestrian or vehicular safety. The proposal
is considered to increase pedestrian amenity but improving the functionality and useability
of the Cove. On this basis the proposal is considered to be consistent with this Schedule.
It is noted that the application has been assessed by the Councils development engineer,
roads engineer and traffic manager. The officers have indicated support for the proposal
subject to conditions which have been incorporated below under Recommendation.
Schedule 8 - Environmental Management
This schedule applies to the assessment of all permissible level 1 and level 2 activities. A
level 1 Activity is defined under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act
1994 (EMPCA) as:
An activity which may cause environmental harm and in respect of which a permit
under the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 is required but does not
include a Level 2 activity or a Level 3 activity.
Environmental harm is defined by EMPCA as any adverse effect on the environment (of
whatever degree or duration) and includes an environmental nuisance.
The proposal is considered unlikely to cause environmental harm, and therefore does not
need to be assessed against this Schedule. However it is noted that the proposal must,
regardless, comply with EMPCA and not cause any environmental nuisance as defined
under that Act.
Conclusion
The proposed wayfinding signage is considered to accord with the provisions of the
Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997. Approval with conditions and advice is
recommended.
Recommendation
That: A.
Pursuant to Part C of the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme 1997, the Council
approve the application for wayfinding signage at Sullivans Cove - various
locations, Hobart for the reasons outlined in the officers report and a permit
containing the following conditions be issued:
1.

Author: Ben Ikin

- 10 -
CPC Agenda
2.
20/7/2015

Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2015/00882-HCC, dated 06/06/2015,
3.
Prior to the start of construction works, the exact location and

information on the signs within the road reservation to be assessed
and approved by the Councils Director City Infrastructure.
Advice: the location of each sign to be assessed to ensure
pedestrian, cyclists and vehicle access and sight lines are not
restricted.
4.
Prior to the construction works associated with each A-, B- and Ctype sign, the location of any of the Council infrastructure within the
road reservation that is within 1m of a sign must be identified as part
of the Dial Before You Dig documentation, and submitted to and
approved by the Councils Director City Infrastructure.
Advice: The Dial Before You Dig requirements must be adhered to. If
the Councils infrastructure is encased by the footpath then this will
need to inform the proposed footing design.
5.

crossovers and nature strips) during construction must be repaired
within 30 days of demand, to the satisfaction of the Councils Director
City Infrastructure, and at the owners cost.
crossovers and nature strips) during construction must be reported to
the inspector within five working days.
and/or reinstated at the owners full cost.
Author: Ben Ikin

- 11 -
CPC Agenda
6.
20/7/2015
The proposed signs must be located at least one metre (measured

horizontally to the nearest external surface of the pipe) clear of the
Councils stormwater main and the foundations must be designed
such that no additional loads are imposed on the main. Prior to the
issue of any building consent pursuant to Building Act 2000 submit a
typical cross-section drawing showing the relationship both vertically
and horizontally between the signs (including foundations) and
stormwater main.
To ensure the protection of the Councils hydraulic
infrastructure.
Author: Ben Ikin
1.
Please consult your private building surveyor to ascertain whether the

proposal requires approval under the Building Act 2000. Where
approval is required this is to be obtained from the Council prior to the
installation of the signage.
2.
As part of the Dial Before You Dig referral process please identify all
Council infrastructure in the road reservation within 1m of the signs.
This information should be submitted to the Councils Director City
Infrastructure for approval. Given the congested nature of
underground infrastructure potholing is suggested to investigate the
exact location of the services in the proposed area and use of a
vacuum excavator or hand digging. If infrastructure is encased by the
footpath in proximity to any of the signs the then this will need to be
addressed in the signs footing design.
3.
Please note that the agreement of the Councils Manager Road and
Environmental Engineering is required to adjust footpath levels.
4.
The concrete footings are to finish below existing footpath level to

allow pavers to be replaced around the signs.
5.
Pavers must not be damaged during removal. Pavers to be

transported and stored by the City of Hobart until reinstatement. If
there are excess pavers then these are to be labelled and securely
stored for future use at the City of Hobarts quarry.

- 12 -
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
6.
Prior to the commencement of any required works the developer

must apply for and obtain a Permit to Temporarily Open Up and
Occupy a Highway (pursuant to Section 46 of the Local Government
(Highways) Act 1982) if not undertaken by the City of Hobart.
Application form and advice regarding the permit requirements can
be found on Councils web site www.hobartcity.com.au. Once a
permit has been issued the developer must contact the Services and
Development Inspector on telephone (03) 6238 2967, at least 48
hours notice prior to the commencement of any works. Please note
completed applications for permits must be accompanied by a Safe
Work Method Statement.
7.
The designer must ensure that the needs of all providers including
TasWater, TasGas, TasNetworks, and Telstra are catered for both in
the design and construction of the works. Underground service
providers should be contacted for line marking of their services and
any requirements or conditions they may have prior to commencing
any works on site. Telephone 1100, Dial Before You Dig, or visit
www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for information on the location of
underground services and cables in relation to the proposed
development prior to commencing any works on site.
(Ben Ikin)
(Leanne Lassig)
Supporting Document(s) Attachment 1 Project Rationale
Attachment 2 Research Report
Author: Ben Ikin

- 13 -
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Sullivans Cove - various locations, Hobart
Description
Application Form
Title
Project rationale
Research report
Tasports owner consent
Signs suite matrix
Archaeological assessment
A type sign with footing type 1

A type sign footing
arrangements
B type sign with footing type 1
B type sign footing
arrangements
C type sign with footing type 1
C type sign footing
arrangements
Signage suite colour palette
Signage elements
Author: Ben Ikin
Drawing
15-00665
166995/1
169069/1
166995/1
40751/1
132843/2
142916/1
4-page word document
Author: Myriad Research (Brian
and Ros Correy)
Date: February 2015
Author: Kevin Moore
Date: 15 May 2015
Spreadsheet
Author: Praxis Environment (Brad
Williams)
Title: Statement of Archaeological
Potential Archaeological Impact
Assessment and Method
Statement
Date: May 2015
Drawing No: AP10/15-04
Date of Drawing:29 April 2015
Extract from Hobart Council
Wayfinding Strategy, page 54.
Date:15 September 2014

- 14 -
Date of
Lodgement to
Council
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
CPC Agenda
A type sign detail

A type sign montage
B type sign detail
B type sign montage
C type sign detail
C type sign montage
D type sign detail
Overview map
Sign IC-B1 location plan and
photo
photo
photo
Sign IC-C1 location plan and
photo
photo
photo
photo
Author: Ben Ikin

Drawing no.: AP10/09-01
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-ICB1
Date of Drawings: 31 March and
13 April 2015
13 April 2015
Date of Drawings: 22 and 28 April
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-ICC1
13 April 2015
2015
2015
2015

- 15 -
20/7/2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
CPC Agenda

photo
Sign IC-D2 location plan and
photo
Sign IC-D5 location plan and
photo
Sign OC-A3 location plan and
photo
Sign W-A1 location plan and
photo
photo
photo
Sign W-B4 location plan and
photo
photo
photo
photo
Sign W-C1 location plan and
photo
photo
photo
Author: Ben Ikin

13 April 2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-ICD2
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-ICD5
Date of Drawings: 13 April 2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-OCA3
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-WA1
2015
2015
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-WB4
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-WC1
2015
2015

- 16 -
20/7/2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
CPC Agenda

photo
photo
photo
photo
photo
Sign W-D3 location plan and
photo
Author: Ben Ikin

2015
2015
2015
2015
2015
Drawing no.: AP10/09- and 11-WD3
2015

- 17 -
20/7/2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
27 May 2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
TasWater
Phone: 13 6992
Fax: 1300 862 066

Council
Planning Permit PLN-15-00665
No.
TasWater details
TasWater
TWDA 2015/00882-HCC
Reference No.
TasWater
Jason Taylor
Contact
Response issued to
Council notice
4/06/2015
date

Phone No. (03) 6237 8258

Development details
Address 18 HUNTER ST, HOBART
Property ID (PID)
7419904
Description of
HCC Wayfinding Signage
development
Prepared by
Overview Map AP10/09-01
Revision No.
Date of Issue
29/05/2015
Conditions
Pursuant to the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 (TAS) Section 56P(2)(a) TasWater does not object
to the proposed development and no conditions are imposed.
Advice
Nil
Declaration
Authority Notice.
Authorised by
Jason Taylor
Page 1 of 1
ay
R
yB
nd
Sa
ri
et
W-C1
W-B6
W-B7
IC-C3
et
lS
tre
el
pb
W-C8
IC-C1
IC-C8
IC-B11
IC-D5
IC-C10
et
aP
lac
e
OC-A3
an
c
IC-B1
Sa
la
oa
d
Str
e
St
re
e
W-D3 M
urr
ay
Str
e
IC-B2
a
c
qu
a
th
le
eS
t
re
e
Ca
m
iso
Eli
za
be
D
a
ve
sto
Gla
d
W-A3
W-C9
IC-D2
W-C4
et
Str
e
W-B4
et
Str
e
IC-C2
Eva
ns
W-B5 Hu
nte
r
W-C3
Castray Esplanade
W-C10
Salamanca Place
W-A1
W-C7
et
Ar
gy
y
S
tre
e
e St
ree
t
nS
tre
Mo
rr
W-A4
29 April 2015
n/a
date drawn
original drawing scale
drawing no.
AP10/09-01
Location of signs within this application, as

defined by the boundaries of Sullivans Cove
Planning Scheme, 1997.
AP Contemporary Wayfinding
10 System
= Watefront
= Inner City
= Outer City
20/7/2015
A3
W
IC
OC
original drawing size
Overview Map
W-C6
D-Sign
C-Sign
B-Sign
A-Sign
Legend:
DOCUMENT
received on the 27 May 2015.
CPC Agenda
00
21
00
23
A
C
AN
M
A
L E
A
S AC
PL
date drawn
31 March 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-B1
Wayfinding location information for planning approval.
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-B1
34
Existing Tree
Existing lightpole
Wayfinding sign IC-B1
DOCUMENT
Y
E
V
A
D
R
T
S
T
E
E
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-B1
13 April 2015
Photo illustrates proposed wayfinding infrastructure

location for planning approval.
A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
Wayfinding Infrastructure
IC-B1
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
M
ST URR
RE AY
ET
Align Wayfinding sign to

edge of existing tree base.
DOCUMENT
00
24
00
48
date drawn
A4
31 March 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-B2
10 System
20/7/2015
The Hobart
Treasury
Inner City
IC-B2
Wayfinding sign IC-B2
Existing tree base.
Existing tree.
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-B2
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
IC-B2
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
180
0
FRANKLIN
SQUARE
DOCUMENT
176
0
BE
IZA
EL
TH
date drawn
A4
22 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-B11
10 System
20/7/2015
Existing bus shelter.
Existing rubbish bin.
Existing bench seat.
Wayfinding sign IC-B11.
Existing traffic signal pole.
Inner City
IC-B11
ET
RE
ST
CPC Agenda
200
date drawn
28 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-B11

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-B11
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
ST
R
E
E
T
D
AV
E
Y
00
34
Hobart Council Centre
DOCUMENT
00
38
date drawn
A4
31 March 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-C1
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-C1
EL
IZA
ST BE
RE TH
ET
Existing hoop bike rack.
Remove end bike rack.
Existing kerb.
Wayfinding sign IC-C1

Position wayfinding sign along
groove line in paving.
Existing traffic pole.

CPC Agenda
60
0
mi
n.
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-C1

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-C1
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
2100
4100
1500
Cycleway
date drawn
01 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-C2
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-C2
TasPorts
E
ST VAN
RE S
ET
Edge of existing cycleway.
Wayfinding sign IC-C2.
Inside edge of kerb at

end of grass verge.
Edge of existing
grass verge.
DAVEY STREET
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-C2

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-C2
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
City Hall
00
18
00
64
ST
RE
E
T
DOCUMENT
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-C3
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-C3
Existing traffic signal pole.
Align wayfinding sign with centre

of City Hall column.
Align with tangent

of kerb inside edge.
M
AC
Q
U
A
R
I
EL
L
E
S
T
CA
M
PB
T
R
E
E
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-C3
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
20/7/2015
IC-C3
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Q
C
A
M
UA
E
RI
E
R
T
ET
Town Hall
00
56
DOCUMENT
19
60
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
ST
n/a
G
R
A
E
L
Y
T
E
RE
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-C8
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-C8
Existing parking sign.
Align centre of wayfinding sign

to kerb tangent.
Existing Traffic signal P.ole.
TMAG
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-C8
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
IC-C8
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Public Toilets
700
date drawn
31 March 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-C10
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-C10
7000mm from edge of

existing garden bed.

edge of existing paving of
footpath.
FRANKLIN
SQUARE
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-C10

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-C10
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
E
RE
ES
I
R
A
U
Q
AC
M
DOCUMENT
M
A
C
L
E
B
E
E
R
ST
T
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-D2
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-D2
Existing sign pole.

Remove existing Wayfining
information froim sign pole.
Wayfinding sign IC-D2.

Fix to existing sign pole at
height of 1300mm to
bottom edge.
Hotel Grand
Chancellor
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-D2

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-D2
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
BE
TH
ET
RE
ST
date drawn
A4
13 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-IC-D5
10 System
20/7/2015
Inner City
IC-D5
ST
D
A
V
E
Y
T
RE
E
EL
IZA
Wayfinding sign IC-D5.

Corner mount to edge of brick
retaining wall.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-IC-D5

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
IC-D5
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Existing bench.
DOCUMENT
LA
CE
SA
AY
B
Y
D
N
195
0
D
A
RO
date drawn
09 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-OC-A3
10 System
20/7/2015
Outer City
OC-A3
Existing rubbish bin.
Existing bench.
Wayfinding sign OC-A3. In place of existing

information map sign, which is to be relocated and
footing reused for Wayfinding sign.
Existing information map structure.

Existing information map footing.
KIR
KS
WA
YP
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-OC-A3

n/a

1O System
OC-A3
20/7/2015
A4
CPC Agenda
Salamanca Fresh
KEN
600
min.
SALAMANCA PLACE
NED
Y
L
A
NE
date drawn
01 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-A1
10 System
20/7/2015
Waterfront
W-A1
Maldinis
Remove existing wayfinding information. Negotiate

replacement sign with information specific to
Salamanca Place, such as a Trader location map.
Existing parking signs.
Wayfinding sign W-A1.
DOCUMENT
Align wayfinding sign to centre of parking bay.
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-A1
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-A1
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
IZA
BE
TH
ST
ET
RE
EL
FR
N
K
LIN
DOCUMENT
00
21
date drawn
01 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-A3
10 System
20/7/2015
Waterfront
W-A3
Align to centre of
existing bench.
ELIZABETH PIER
Existing bollards.
Existing lightpole.
Align to centre of
existing second
parking bay.
Existing kerb.
W
H
AR
CPC Agenda
22
00
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-A3
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-A3
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
R
HUNTE
1600
1600
STREET
Path of pedestrian movement from crossing

at Hunter Street.
Align Wayfinding sign with existing bollard.
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-A4
10 System
20/7/2015
MAC 02
Cruiseship
Terminal
Waterfront
W-A4
Existing pedestrian crossing point at Hunter Street
nk
a
Taxi R
uses
B
r
u
o
and T
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-A4

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-A4
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
Waterfront
W-B4
13 April 2015
n/a
A4
Memorial and
Information Panels
EE
T
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-B4
10 System
TR
ER
S
20/7/2015
00
36
HU
NT
DOCUMENT
Existing street sign.
VICTORIA DOCK
Wayfinding Sign W-B4 to

replace existing wayfinding
sign in this location.
Existing lightpole.
Existing parking bays.
0
100
Existing bollards.
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-B4
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-B4
20/7/2015
nning Authority: Hobart City Council
DOCUMENT
s document is one of the documents
vant to the application for a planning
mit No. PLN-15-00665-01 and was
eived on the 27 May 2015.
CPC Agenda
R
E
ET
DA
V
EY
Wayfinding sign W-B5
VICTORIA DOCK
00
10
50
0
mi
n.
ST
DOCUMENT
date drawn
A4
13 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-B5
10 System
20/7/2015
Existing light poles.

Wayfinding sign aligns to
existing light poles.
Existing street sign.
500 min. from existing drain
ET
ST
RE
Waterfront
W-B5
NT
ER
Existing kerb
HU
CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-B5
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-B5
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Existing wall of
Parliament Sqaure.
60
00
Existing sign pole.
Existing kerb.
Existing signal box.
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-B6
10 System
20/7/2015
Existing Tas Networks Lighting

pole 152670.
Run power for Wayfinding
sign W-B6 from this pole.
Entrance to Parliment Lawn.
DOCUMENT
Waterfront
W-B6
Existing portion of bike rack to be maintained.
Remove bike rack and relocate to other side of signal box.

Vacated space is proposed location for HCC Poster Pole.
Wayfinding sign
W-B6.
N
MORRISO
STREET
Relocated bike rack

to this loctaion.
EE
TR
RA
YS
MU
R
CPC Agenda
56
00
80
0
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-B6
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-B6
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
Waterfront
W-B7
A4
28 April 2015
Existing wayfinding sign to be removed.
Existing wayfinding sign to be removed.
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-B7
10 System
20/7/2015
640
Constitution
Dock
Existing interpretation panels to be relocated further along

concrete wall, away from propsed Wayfinding sign.
Existing concrete wall.
Wayfinding sign W-B7. In place of existing

wayfinding sign, which is to be removed.
Existing cycleway.
Mawsons Place
DOCUMENT
DAVEY
STREET
CPC Agenda
date drawn
28 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-B7

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-B7
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
T
E
E
R
E ST
1000
2250
date drawn
09 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C1
10 System
20/7/2015
Waterfront
W-C1
DOCUMENT
Existing tree.
Edge of existing pedestrian crossing.

Wayfinding sign W-C1.
Edge of existing footpath.
Existing tree.
1000
2250
N
O
T
S
LAD
Parliament
Square
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C1

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-C1
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Top of existing access ramp.
Existing kerb.
PW1 Forecourt
3600
DOCUMENT
date drawn
A4
09 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C3
10 System
20/7/2015
LANADE
Waterfront
W-C3
CASTRAY ESP
CPC Agenda
1200
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C3
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-C3
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
42
00
date drawn
13 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C4
10 System
20/7/2015
Waterfront
W-C4
KINGS PIER
DOCUMENT
Existing bench.
Wharf edge.
FRANKLIN WHARF
0
80

centre of existing bench.
Existing parking spaces.
Existing parking sign.

CPC Agenda
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C4
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-C4
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Existing light pole.
2200
1800
date drawn
09 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C6
10 System
20/7/2015
Waterfront
W-C6
CSIRO
Position Wayfinding
sign against
grass verge.
Princes
Park
Existing pedestrian crossing at

entrance to Princes Park.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
CASTR
AY
E
S
P
L
A
N
ADE
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C6
13 April 2015

A4
n/a
date drawn
1O System
W-C6
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
Waterfront
W-C7
01 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C7
10 System
20/7/2015
KELLYS
STEPS
Existing rubbish bins.
Existing parking voiucher

machine.
DOCUMENT
Position Wayfinding sign in

centre of existing parking bay.
Existing kerb.
Kellys
SALAMANCA PLACE
Steps
CPC Agenda
600
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C7

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-C7
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
BE
IZA
EL
TH
ET
RE
ST
Existing tree.
HCC Information Centre
00
16
0
240
90
date drawn
A4
01 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C8
10 System
20/7/2015
Existing tourist bus stop.
Existing line of kerb.
Existing rubbish bin to

be removed.
Existing sign.

Replace existing
wayfinding sign in
this location.
Existing bench.
Waterfront
W-C8
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C8

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-C8
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
Waterfront
W-C9
01 April 2015
n/a
A4
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C9
10 System
Constitution
Dock
20/7/2015
DA
V
TR
E
E
EY
50
DOCUMENT
Wayfinding Sign W-C9.
Existing cycleway.
Existing Lightpole.
Existing lightpole.
Existing brick paving.
Existing tree.
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C9

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-C9
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
Salamanca
Lawns
150
3200
Existing lightpole.
Existing signal box.
Existing phone box.
CASTRAY ESPLANADE
500

Position against edge of Salamca Lawns.
Existing edge of kerb.
date drawn
A4
09 April 2015
n/a
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-C10
10 System
20/7/2015
SALAMANCA
PLACE
Waterfront
W-C10
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-C10

n/a

1O System
20/7/2015
W-C10
A4
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
TR
E
E
T
DA
V
EY
date drawn
A4
09 April 2015
n/a
AY
S
ET
TR
E
drawing no.
AP10/09-W-D3
10 System
RR
20/7/2015
MU
Waterfront
W-D3
Wayfinding sign W-D3.

Fix to existing signpole at height
of 1300mm to bottom edge.
Remove existing wayfinding information.
Existing sign pole.
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
date drawn
13 April 2015
drawing no.
AP10/11-W-D3

n/a

1O System
W-D3
20/7/2015
A4
CPC Agenda

20/7/2015
6.

6.4

SCHEME 2015
6.4.1
109-113 LIVERPOOL STREET, HOBART PUBLIC

ARTWORK PLN-15-00648-01
FILE REF: 5668077 & P/109-113/626
31xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
APPLICATION UNDER HOBART INTERIM PLANNING SCHEME 2015
Type of Report
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
26 August 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00648-01
Address:
109-113 Liverpool Street, Hobart
Applicant:
Hobart City Council, GPO Box 503, Hobart
Proposal:
Public Artwork
Representations:
Nil
Discretion:
One
1.
Executive Summary
1.1.
Planning approval is sought for public artwork.
1.2.
One (1) discretion is invoked.

1.2.1.
2.
Heritage.
1.3.
No representations to the proposal were received within the statutory

advertising period 15 to 29 June 2015.
1.4.
1.5.
Site Detail
2.1.
The site is the Les Lees building at 109-113 Liverpool Street, Hobart. The
public artwork will be on part of the buildings rear wall, which faces into the
small area of public open space in Mathers Place.
2.2.
Refer to figures below.
Author: Ben Ikin
109-113 Liverpool Street
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Fig. 1: A locational image with the site bordered in blue. The subject wall identified with a red arrow.
Fig. 2: A site image with the site bordered in blue. The subject wall is again identified with a red arrow.
Fig. 3. The subject wall identified by the red box which is to be used for public artwork.
Author: Ben Ikin

-2-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Figs. 4 and 5: Existing public art in Mathers Place.
3.
Proposal
3.1.
The proposal is to utilise the full wall identified above in figure 3 for a public
artwork. The size of the wall is 11.7 metres wide by 4.8 metres high. The
artwork will be painted directly onto the wall.
3.2.
The artwork brief identifies that the commissioned artwork is to contribute to

the revitalisation of Mathers Place. The brief states:
The artwork will bring vibrancy to the space with the use of colour and bold
imagery. The work aims to be accessible to a large cross section of the
community, bringing comfort to the elderly users of the area, as well as
engaging children and young adults.
A contemporary approach is proposed to ensure the artwork is modern,
illustrative and unique.
The artwork is to be iconic and memorable, an identifier for the space.
4.
Background
4.1.
5.

5.1.
6.
None relevant.
No representations to the proposal were received during the statutory

advertising period 15 to 29 June 2015.
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within the Central Business zone of the Hobart Interim
6.2.

6.2.1.
The central business zone.
6.2.2.
The heritage code.
Author: Ben Ikin

-3-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
6.3.
20/7/2015

6.3.1.
Discretion Table
Discretion
Number
1
6.3.2.
6.3.2.1.
Discretion Type
Heritage
HIPS
requirement
External
decoration of a
heritage listed
building is
discretionary.
Proposed
development
109-113
Liverpool Street
is a listed
building. The
proposed public
art work will be
painted directly
onto the rear
wall of the listed
building.
Discretion 1 - Heritage
The site is heritage listed under the heritage code. As such the
proposal was referred to the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer who
commented as follows:
i)
Painted rear elevation onto Mathers Lane
ii)
Part of the unpainted elevation.
The development application for the above site is for the provision of
the display of public art from the walls of the rear facing elevation of a
retail unit located at 109-113 Liverpool Street, Hobart.
The property is an existing retail unit and forms part of the
established commercial/retail frontage of this part of Liverpool Street,
Hobart. The rear of the building forms part of the enclosing walls of
Mathers Court, a small area of informal public open space which site
within the active frontages of the Liverpool Street/Criterion
Street/Murray Street and Bathurst Street block.
The property is a mid-Victorian purpose built retail unit based upon a
distinctive metal frame supported by pillar construction. This place is
heritage listed under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
Author: Ben Ikin

-4-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The supporting documentation would appear to indicate that the

proposal would consist of a painted mural onto part of the properties
rear wall that has previously been painted. However, the description
does not make this distinction and as such it is considered that the
application seeks permission to utilise the whole wall for public art in
principal, and not for the approval of an individual mural or art work.
The proposal would visually impact solely the rear elevation of the
building which has already been partially compromised through its
painting and creation of new openings such as a recent access
doorway and awning. It is acknowledged that the building has been
constructed in such a way so as to accommodate flexibility in use.
Consequently, the supporting brick framework has no particular
architectural detailing and its integrity is derived primarily from its
ability to support the metal frame. As such, it is considered that whilst
further damage to the brick work should be minimised by way of
condition, the use of the walls for public art would not have a
detrimental impact upon the special architectural and cultural
heritage characteristics of the site.
It is therefore considered that subject to suitable conditions, the
principal of the proposal would not result in detriment to the historic
cultural heritage significance of the heritage listed site as stated
under Clauses E.13.7.2 P1 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme
2015.
The proposal is considered acceptable when measured against the
performance criteria of Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
Suggested Conditions:
A.
All murals or other works of art to be displayed on the site shall not
convey a defined advertising message by way of content,
typography, logo or directional motif to the occupier of the building or
type of business operating from the site.
The use of the building as a canvas for the display of public art
is considered appropriate and not to the detriment of the
Heritage Listed site solely in the event that said public art
represent identifiable pieces of artistic expression and not
signage as designated within the Hobart Interim Planning
Scheme 2015.
Author: Ben Ikin

-5-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
B.
20/7/2015
The application of coating substances directly onto external walls

shall be limited to paint or low grade natural adhesives and then
solely to those areas of the rear wall of the site already painted at the
date of this approval.
To prevent further non-reversible damage to existing brickwork,
ensure the heritage values of the place of cultural significance
are not impacted upon and the conservation principles of the
Burra Charter are considered.
C.
Any subsequent public art requiring physical attachment to the

external rear walls of the site other than by adhesive shall be
attached by way of fixings installed in existing mortar joints and holes
using non-ferrous fixings.
7.
6.3.2.2.
The officers comments are supported. Proposed condition A is

considered to be adequately addressed by condition1 under Section
9 Recommendations below. Condition 1 requires the proposal to be
substantially in accordance with the application documents as
submitted. A sign has not been proposed and so is not being
approved. Any future signage will need to be the subject of a
separate planning application.
6.3.2.3.
Similarly with condition C, the proposal is not for any artwork to be

physically attached to the building. If public artwork in the future
seeks to be physically attached to the wall that would need to be the
subject of a separate planning application.
Discussion
7.1.
The proposal is for public artwork to the rear of the building at 109-113
Liverpool Street, Hobart.
7.2.
The artwork does not amount to signage as defined by the Hobart Interim
Planning Scheme 2015 because it is not a device intended to give
information, advertise or attract attention to a place, product, service or event.
The artwork is intended to draw attention to the artwork itself and to contribute
to the revitalisation of Mathers Place.
7.3.
The artwork is considered to be a positive addition to Mathers Place.
7.4.
As demonstrated above the artwork is considered to be consistent with the

discretionary provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
Author: Ben Ikin

-6-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
7.5.
8.
20/7/2015
Conclusion
8.1.
9.
The proposed public artwork at 109-113 Liverpool Street, Hobart satisfies the
relevant provision of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, and as such is
recommended for approval.
Recommendations
That: A. Pursuant to the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, the Council
approve the application for a public artwork at 109-113 Liverpool Street,
Hobart for the reasons outlined in the officers report and a permit
containing the following conditions be issued:
1.

2.
The application of coating substances directly onto external walls

must be limited to paint or low grade natural adhesives and then
solely to those areas of the rear wall of the site already painted at the
date of this approval.
Author: Ben Ikin

-7-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
B.
20/7/2015
The Council include the following advice to the applicant:

1.

the installation of the public artwork.

(Ian Stanley)
Date of Report:

Attachment B Covering Information and Project Brief
Author: Ben Ikin

-8-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

109-113 Liverpool Street, Hobart
Description
Application Form
Title
Covering info
Hobart City Council Artwork
Brief Public Art opportunity
Mathers Place Courtyard
Artwork Rear Wall of 111
Liverpool St, Mathers Place
Author: Ben Ikin
Drawing
15-00648
148680/1 (136029/1 historic title)
1 page
Date of
Lodgement to
Council
25 May 2015
11 June 2015
25 May 2015
21 pages
10 June 2015

-9-
File Ref: 5668077 P/109-113/626
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
ARTWORK BRIEF
PUBLIC ART OPPORTUNITY
MATHERS PLACE COURTYARD

ARTWORK
Rear wall of 111 Liverpool St, MATHERS PLACE
CPC Agenda
1.
INTRODUCTION
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
The City of Hobart (the City) wishes to engage

an artist,
craft
Planning Authority:
Hobart
City Council
practitioner or designer, or a collaboration of artists, craft practitioners or
designers (the Artist/s) to create an artwork on a courtyard wall in
Mathers Place (the Commission). The aim of this project is to
contribute to the revitalisation of Mathers Place with the addition of an
artwork on the rear wall of the Les Lees building, 111 Liverpool St,
Hobart (the Project).
CPC Agenda
2.
BACKGROUND
2.1.
Mathers Place
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
The Mathers Place precinct has been a hub of Planning

the Hobart
CBD
forCity Council
Authority:
Hobart
generations. Home to a number of community organisations, the area
has been recently refurbished to meet a growing demand for
contemporary community facilities. Linking Bathurst Street through to
Criterion Street and Liverpool Street, the area provides a number of
services including aged care programs and child care, as well a variety
of retailers, including the long-standing Catholic Womens League
Australia (CWLA) Craft Shop and the iconic Flower Room.
The City of Hobart provides Mathers House and Criterion House as
places for activities and programs for a range of people, with a focus on
older members of the community. The houses provide a warm,
welcoming, cheerful and safe environment along with a wide range of
social, recreational, cultural and educational activities.
The redevelopment project utilised placemaking methodology and had
extensive community engagement. A Mathers Place Action Team was
formed comprising representatives from the community, buildings
owners and business operators. This team were actively involved in the
development of the design plans, implementation of the construction
project and the Street Party celebration at the completion of the
project. This team continue to provide ongoing engagement regarding
this area.
The external areas of Mathers Place were redeveloped as the first
project from the City of Hobarts Inner City Action Plan. The newly
created small green spaces within the precinct provide a quiet oasis in
the city for locals and visitors alike to enjoy a coffee, sit & have lunch,
read a book in the sun or play on the grass.
Mathers Place also provides the perfect adjoining space on Sunday
mornings to the newly relocated Farm Gate Markets.
CPC Agenda
2.2.
Inner City Action Plan Mathers Place
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
The Inner City Action Plan (ICAP) has been developed by the City of
Hobart and contains a number of key recommendations
from theHobart
GehlCity Council
Planning Authority:
Architects Report, Hobart 2010 Public Spaces and Public Life a city
with people in mind. It outlines 15 recommended projects designed to
attract people and activity into Hobart and to create a vital, dynamic city
centre, including Action Project Nine (AP09): Improve Community
Facilities Criterion Street and Mathers Lane.
The AP09 project included:
The rebranding of the area as Mathers Place, with the 50 and

Better Centre building being renamed Mathers House and the
Catholic Womans League building being renamed as Criterion
House
Improving the pedestrian link from Hobart Central Car Park

through Mathers Lane to the city
Revitalising existing plantings in the Mathers Lane open space

and designing a new complimentary landscape that includes
seating, signage and appropriate way finding systems
Reviewing waste management arrangements to reduce the

impact of garbage bins in Mathers Lane and Criterion Lane areas
Providing community facilities for public events and activities,

including a level courtyard adjacent to Mathers House
Providing inviting areas where the citys culture can be

experienced and enjoyed
Streets and squares can act as connectors as well as urban lounges and
meeting places. They also play an important role as the scene for activities of
a more urban nature than green recreational spaces.
Jan Gehl Hobart A City with People in Mind p.38
Laneways offer very different urban space experiences compared to the

primary street network here you have an opportunity to explore. The intimate
lanes can create a secondary network in the city with their own separate
identities. Lanes have the opportunity to have different identities, where the
artistic come together.
Jan Gehl Hobart A City with People in Mind p.25
CPC Agenda
2.3.
Precinct Cultural Projects
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
All of the creative activities in Mathers Place aim to reflect the area as
Authority:
Hobart City Council
the home of a number of community organisationsPlanning
and a highly
utilised
oasis within the city.
The revitalised Mathers Place is home to a number of creative
elements:
Soapbox an ongoing City of Hobart cultural initiative giving voice to
artists and the community and activating public space. Soapbox
provides the infrastructure for artists and community groups to extend
their projects into public space. The three billboards are updated
regularly; the current project, Elder/HOOD, is the fourth Soapbox
project since its inception.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Chalkboard located directly adjacent to the Commission location, a

large blank chalkboard is free for the community to use.
Wordplay An engaging activity for children and families, Wordplay is

located in the large courtyard at the top of Mathers Place and is a wavy
steel play space that has magnetic words and letters, supplied by
Mathers House.
DOCUMENT
5
CPC Agenda
3.
20/7/2015
POLICIES AND STRATEGIES

DOCUMENT
The public art developed for the Commission will be consistent
with the
following City of Hobart corporate documents:
3.1.
Public Art Strategy (March 2005)

Vision for Public Art
Hobarts Public Art will contribute to positioning the City as a preeminent centre of cultural excellence through the commissioning,
interpretation, maintenance and promotion of contemporary public art,
craft and design of the highest quality, strategic partnering to achieve
program outcomes and delivery utilising best practice processes,
management methods and community engagement principles.
3.2.
Creative Hobart (December 2012)

Vision
Hobart will be recognised as a creative and culturally engaging
environment that supports both those who wish to practice their art and
creative endeavours and those who seek to participate in meaningful
and exciting cultural activities.
3.3.
Strategic Plan 2014 - 2019

Future Directions
FD7 [Hobart] is dynamic, vibrant and culturally expressive
Supporting creative industries
FD4 [Hobart]
management
achieves
good
quality
development
Develop place-making opportunities for Hobart
Develop and manage cultural values
and
urban
FD6 [Hobart] builds strong and healthy communities through diversity,

participation and empathy
Stimulate community participation
Improve management and utilisation of community facilities and

open spaces
6
CPC Agenda
4.
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
This
document
OBJECTIVES OF THE COMMISSION
No. PLN-15-00648-01 and was
The objective of the Commission is to contributepermit
to the
revitalisation of
Mathers Place with the addition of a 2D or sculptural relief artwork on

the rear wall of the Les Lees building, 111 Liverpool
St. Authority: Hobart City Council
Planning
This new public art Project directly contributes to the communitys vision
for Mathers Place:
The creative community hub of Hobart that promotes wellbeing,
positive living and learning.
A place that is welcoming and accessible to all.
The Commission will bring vibrancy to the space with the use of colour
and bold imagery. The work aims to be accessible to a large crosssection of the community, bringing comfort to the elderly users of the
area, as well as engaging children & young adults.
A contemporary approach is proposed to ensure the mural is modern,
illustrative and unique.
The artwork is to be iconic and memorable, an identifier for the space.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
5.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE COMMISSION
5.1.
Overall
The Commission will contribute to the Mathers Place precinct by
adopting place-making principles to ensure the work is a significant
feature of the revitalised space. A number of community organisations
and facilities are at the heart of Mathers Place, including:
Mathers House provides a wide range of social, recreational, cultural
and educational activities for the older people of Hobart in a warm,
welcoming, cheerful and safe environment. The activities are developed
in consultation and partnership with individuals, community groups and
organisations that have an interest in the well-being of older people.
Criterion House is home to the Catholic Womens League Australia
(CWLA) Craft Shop, office and newly established CWLA Research
Centre. The CWLA has had a branch in Tasmania since 1936.
The Goodstart Early Learning Centre is Hobarts first inner-city
childcare centre and provides a safe play area within a private
courtyard. Hobart Centrals wonderful team of early childhood
professionals work in partnership with families and the broader
community to provide an environment that is inclusive, respectful and
accepting; where all children will develop a sense of belonging and
connectedness.
The Playhouse Theatre is home to the Hobart Repertory Theatre
Society and continues to provide a regular program of live theatre in its
unique home. Originally built as a church in 1864, the Playhouse has
called 106 Bathurst Street home since 1937.
The Flower Room is Hobarts longest running co-operative,
celebrating its 70th anniversary in 2014. Originally established by the
Bailey sisters during World War II, the Flower Room was established to
sell home-produce to support the war effort. The Flower Rooms unique
fellowship and culture has enabled its survival and it is now blossoming
in Mathers Place following five changes of location in the CBD.
DOCUMENT
8
CPC Agenda
5.2.
20/7/2015
Commission Thematic
The Commission could work with a single theme, or a combination of
themes from the list below:
Floral Illustration - As well as celebrating the iconic Flower

Room, floral or botanical themes highlight the tradition of giving
flowers on the opening night of a live theatre performance, flowers
in church, children playing in the garden, and the role flowers play
in community giving, particularly among the elderly.
Home Comforts in the surrounding buildings, a range of

activities take place that have existed in Hobart homes for
decades. Play, learning, sharing, knitting, sewing, cooking, music,
board games, homemade produce, support; the collaborative
environment in Mathers Place is one of comfort and familiarity.
111 Stories 111 Liverpool Street was one of the first buildings in
Hobart, and has a rich history of commerce, fashion and family.
Something to be found at the bottom of the lane - what is

found at the bottom of the lane? What lives there? Caring for the
elderly, delighting the children, keeping the space safe between
the busy streets.
These themes tie strongly to the historic and community values of the
area while a contemporary approach will ensure the Commission sits
comfortably within the modern multi-layered space.
Please note: the above themes are suggestions, the City is willing to
consider another approach should the Artist/s wish to propose an
alternative.
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
6.
BUDGET ALLOCATION
The total budget for the Commission is $20,000
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
received
on the 10 June 2015.
ex.
GST.
This budget must contain all costs associated with the Commission,
including: all artist fees (Concept Design & Design Development fees
etc), artwork design, development application fees, fabrication, subcontractor fees, technical advice i.e. engineering (if required), any costs
associated with transporting the artwork to site, all installation costs and
any other related expenses.
7.
LOCATION AND EXTENT OF COMMISSION

The Commission is located on the rear wall of the Les Lees building,
111 Liverpool St, Hobart. The brick wall faces the lower end of Mathers
Place, the rear of Mathers House and the Flower Room in Criterion
House. When facing the wall, Criterion Street and Mathers Arcade are
on the left and Mathers Lane is directly to the right. Way finding signs for
Mathers Arcade and Mathers Lane are located on the left and right-hand
side of the wall respectively.
Rough measurements of the wall indicate it is approximately 11.7m wide
by 4.8m high, approximately 56 square meters.
The artwork could cover the whole wall or part/s of the wall, but as the
intention of the Commission is that the artwork be a signature piece for
the area it is desirable that the artwork cover most of the wall surface in
some way.
The artwork can be applied directly to the wall (i.e. paint), or can be
attached to the wall (i.e. sculptural relief, panels).
The wall is constructed from traditional red brick, which has been
painted with cream low-sheen acrylic paint. The bottom section of the
wall has been rendered. The wall is not a consistent smooth surface,
and includes a variety of integrated elements, although the paint is the
primary wall finish.
The Commission will be the subject of a Development Application,
which the City will prepare in collaboration with the successful Artist/s.
111 Liverpool Street, including the Commission location, is privately
owned. The City will enter into an agreement with the building owner to
cover the use of the wall for the Commission.
10
CPC Agenda
8.
COMMISSION CONSIDERATIONS
8.1.
The Public Realm and Duty of Care
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
The site is in an unsupervised public place therefore

the
Artist/s
must
Planning
Authority:
Hobart
City Council
exercise a Duty of Care in terms of design and material selection.
The Commission must address public risk and access considerations,
such as but not limited to:
8.2.
can withstand a certain level of vandalism, especially in this

instance illegal graffiti
ensuring there are no dangerous protrusions or entrapment issues

which might cause injury
cannot be easily climbed
provide structural engineering certification during the design

development phase of the Commission if required
ensuring that the work conforms to relevant Australian Standards

as appropriate including CPTEP (Crime Prevention Through
Environmental Design) as well as complying with The Disability
Discrimination Act (DDA)
Site Considerations
The site is a popular public space, hidden away within the city, where
community members of all ages visit for services, shopping, activities,
assistance, or simply to find a peaceful place to have lunch.
Access is 24-hours a day, and although the wall itself is not directly lit,
the area is now well-lit as part of the recent refurbishment works.
The path area directly in front of the wall is a public thoroughfare. This
must remain a consideration at all times during the Project, including
during the installation of the work.
9.
MATERIALS
Materials proposed should be suitable for the Commission and the site.
Long-term maintenance must be considered when developing concepts,
minimising maintenance work as far as possible through the selection of
appropriate materials and surface treatments.
11
CPC Agenda
10.
SCOPE OF WORK
The Project will be developed in stages as
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
follows:received on the 10 June 2015.
10.1. Expressions of Interest

The City is seeking Expressions of Interest (EOI) from Australian artists,
craft practitioners and designers who wish to be considered for the
design, fabrication and installation of the Commission.
The EOI submission and supporting material will be assessed by a
review of the Selection Criteria as outlined in the Artist Expression of
Interest Form (Attachment 1):
Artist statement a brief conceptual statement interpreting the

Artwork Brief. Describe how you would approach the opportunity.
Demonstrated capacity of the artist to deliver the work within

timeframes, budget and construction requirements
Relevant artistic practice and previous experience
Relevance of supporting images in correlation to this Commission
The EOIs will initially be assessed by the Public Art Project Manager
and the Public Art Project Team, before being presented to the City of
Hobarts Public Art Special Committee for the final decision. Based on
the criteria above an Artist (or a collaboration of Artists) will be selected
to proceed as a direct commission.
10.2. Stage One - Concept Development
The Artist/s will enter into a Commissioning Agreement with the City of
Hobart for Stage One Concept Development. The fees and payment
schedule for this stage will be negotiated with the successful Artist/s
prior to entering into the contractual arrangement (please note: this fee
is included within the total Project costs as per 6. BUDGET
ALLOCATION).
Requirements:
Attend briefing sessions and site visits as required
Undertake research, and consultation if necessary, in relation to

the identified themes
Develop concept including form, dimensions, colours and

materials
12
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Prepare an indicative budget, including Design Development,

fabrication and installation. This must be within or equal to the
total budget for the Commission as per 6. BUDGET ALLOCATION
Prepare an indicative timeline, including Design Development,

fabrication and installation. Provide detail of Artist/s availability
and any prior or upcoming commitments that may impact on the
Commission timeline
Prepare a presentation of the Concept Design, including finalised

concept drawings, maquette, photomontage, detail drawings etc.
for the proposed work
Present Concept Design to the Public Art Project Team and/or

Public Art Special Committee for consideration and approval
Provide any other details, information or undertake any further

tasks reasonably required by the City to enable the City to
evaluate the Concept Design
The Concept Design will be assessed by the Public Art Project

Manager, Public Art Project Team and Public Art Special Committee.
The assessment will consider suitability to the site, materials, budget
and timeline.
Once the Concept Design has been approved by the Public Art Project
Team and the Public Art Special Committee, the Public Art Project
Manager will consult internal and external stakeholders, including
building owners, tenants and community groups in the immediate area
of the site.
Following on from this approval and consultation the Artist/s will then
proceed to the next stage.
If the Concept Design does not gain approval, The City reserves the
right to not commission the selected Artist/s, and may appoint another
Artist/s from the previous received Expressions of Interest. If another
suitable artist is not found, the City reserves the right to start the EOI
process again and call for new Expressions of Interest.
DOCUMENT
13
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
10.3. Stage Two - Design Development, Fabrication and Installation

The Artist/s will enter into a Commissioning Agreement with the City of
Hobart for Stage Two Design Development, Fabrication and
Installation. The fees and payment schedule for this stage will be
negotiated with the successful Artist/s prior to entering into the
contractual arrangement (please note: this fee is included within the
total Project costs as per 6. BUDGET ALLOCATION).
Design Development Requirements:
Further develop the design to fabrication-ready
Engage external technical expertise where required
Provide engineering certification if required
Gain approval of sub-contractors, if using, from the Public Art

Project Manager
Provide technical information for all materials proposed for

fabrication and installation
Provide proposed fabrication and installation details for the

Commission
Provide confirmed timeline for all works
Finalise detailed budget, including all fabrication and installation

costs
Present final design and detailed budget to the Public Art Project
Manager for approval
Upon approval from the Public Art Project Manager, the Artist/s will
proceed to fabrication and installation of the Commission.
APPLICATION
At this stage the Artist/s, together with the Public ArtDEVELOPMENT
Project Manager,
DOCUMENT
will prepare and lodge a Development Application.
Fabrication and Installation Requirements:

Fabricate the work as per the approved design, using prePlanning Authority: Hobart City Council
approved subcontractors (if using)
Consult regularly with the Public Art Project Manager throughout

the fabrication and installation process, and comply with
inspections conducted by the Public Art Project Manager and/or
14
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
members of the Public Art Project Team (the details of these

inspections will be determined in advance by the Artist/s, any
relevant sub-contractors and the Public Art Project Manager)
Comply with the relevant legislation, Work Health and Safety Act
(2012) and Work Health and Safety Regulation (2011), at all
stages of fabrication and installation
Ensure the work is of a quality and standard appropriate to the

nature of the work and that the work meets all relevant Australian
Standards
Upon completion of installation the Artist/s will need to provide a

Maintenance Manual. The Maintenance Manual should include:
Artist/s name and contact details
Artwork title, description of Work and date of creation
A description of the materials used and any installed services or

equipment, and their mode of operation
If equipment has been installed, equipment operating procedures

and suppliers names, addresses and telephone numbers
An inspection, testing and maintenance program detailing the

routine and materials required to maintain the Work throughout its
intended lifespan
A list of sub-contractors with appropriate contact details
Anticipated lifespan of the Work
10% of the Commission fee is held by the City until practical completion
of installation is achieved and a maintenance manual (of a standard
acceptable to the City) is received.
DOCUMENT
15
CPC Agenda
11.
20/7/2015
PROJECT TIMELINE
Friday 13 February 2015
Call for EOI submissions open
Tuesday 10 March 2015
Closing date for EOI submissions
10 20 March 2015
23 March 20 April 2015
20 April 2015
Assessment of EOI submissions

and selection of Artist/s
Successful and unsuccessful
Artists notified of outcome
Stage One - Concept Design stage
Concept Design presentation &
approval
Successful Concept Design
presented back to stakeholders
Stage Two -
May June 2015
Design Development
Development Application
Fabrication and Installation
June 2015
Project completion
Launch (TBC)
The project timeline will be reassessed by the Artist/s and the Public Art
Project Manager following approval at Concept Design stage, and
finalised for fabrication, installation and launch during Stage Two.
DOCUMENT
16
CPC Agenda
12.
20/7/2015
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
12.1. Project Management

The Citys Public Art Coordinator is the nominated Public Art Project
Manager for the Commission and will be the key point of contact for the
Artist/s during the Commission.
Contact Details
Alice Holder
Public Art Coordinator
City of Hobart
Phone: (03) 6238 2845
Email: holdera@hobartcity.com.au
DOCUMENT
12.2. Public Art Project Team

A Public Art Project Team is established comprising relevant City of
Hobart officers. Members of the Mathers Place Action Team, building
owners, tenants, community members and other stakeholders may be
invited to join the Public Art Project Team as appropriate.
The Public Art Project Team will be responsible for short-listing artists at
the Expression of Interest stage to be presented to the Public Art
Special Committee for consideration and selection of a successful artist.
The Public Art Project Team will review the Concept Design/s before
they are presented to the Public Art Special Committee for consideration
and approval.
12.3. Public Art Special Committee
The City of Hobarts Public Art Special Committee comprises several
Aldermen, relevant City of Hobart staff and nominated arts professionals
from Hobarts arts community.
The Public Art Special Committee is responsible for selecting the Artist/s
to be engaged for the Commission, and approves the Concept Design
before the Artist/s can proceed to Stage Two.
17
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
12.4. Declaring Conflict of Interest

12.4.1.
Artist/s applying for the Commission must declare any

potential conflict of interest at the time of submitting an EOI,
or immediately as it arises during the Commission process.
Where the disclosed situation reveals a real conflict of
interest, or is likely to be perceived as a conflict of interest,
the Public Art Project Manager will take appropriate action.
If the conflict is in regards to an employee at the City of
Hobart, the Public Art Project Manager may ensure that the
relevant officer/s are not privy to the Commission process. If
the conflict is in regards to a person who is a member of the
Public Art Project Team or Public Art Special Committee,
this may result in that team or committee member being
removed from the Project. If it cannot be successfully
resolved otherwise, the artist may be removed from the
Project at any stage.
12.4.2.
Members of the Public Art Project Team and the Public Art
Special Committee must declare any potential conflict of
interest during the Project to the Public Art Project Manager
immediately. Where the disclosed situation reveals a real
conflict of interest, or is likely to be perceived as a conflict of
interest, the Public Art Project Manager will take appropriate
action, which may result in the team or committee member
being removed from the Project. In the case of the Public
Art Project Manager being the individual declaring the
conflict of interest, the matter is deferred to Director,
Community Development.
12.5. City of Hobart Employee Eligibility

Members of the team who are responsible for the delivery of the Project,
including the Cultural Programs Team and the Public Art Project Team,
along with members of their immediate family, are not eligible to submit
an EOI for this Commission.
Other City employees, along with members of their families, are eligible
to apply, as long as they adhere to the Tendering for Council Work
Policy (Hobart City Council employee policy).
DOCUMENT
18
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
12.6. Procurement
The City of Hobarts public art procurement process aims to
demonstrate best practice, transparency and fairness in line with the
HCC Procurement and Code for Tenders and Contracts.
Code for Tenders and Contracts (February 2012)
Purpose
This Code provides a statement of ethics which underline best practices
to be applied by Council officers with a role in organising or participating
in procurement and Service Providers when offering to provide Council
with goods, services or works and when engaged by Council to supply it
with goods, services or works.
For further information, or for a copy of the Code, please visit:
http://www.hobartcity.com.au/Council/Procurement
13.
EXTENT OF CONTRACT
The selected Artist/s will be required to enter into a Commissioning
Agreement with the City of Hobart. The Commissioning Agreement is
executed in two stages; Stage One Concept Design and Stage Two
Design Development, Fabrication and Installation. Both contracts will be
negotiated with the Artist/s prior to commencement of the relevant
Project stage, including fees and payment schedules.
As a condition of contract, the Artist/s will have to provide a copy of
current Public and Product Liability Insurance Certificate (minimum $10
million liability).
DOCUMENT
19
CPC Agenda
14.
20/7/2015
EXPRESSION OF INTEREST REQUIREMENTS
14.1. Submissions
Submissions should demonstrate an understanding of the opportunity
and suitability for the Project. Artists are required to submit the following
to register their interest in being considered for the Project:
1.
Completed Artist Expression of Interest Form (Attachment 1).
2.
A current Curriculum Vitae (no longer than two [2] A4 pages)
3.
Images: No more than ten (10) digital images in JPEG format,

maximum 500kb per image.
PLEASE NOTE:
At EOI stage Artists are not required to provide concepts and are
specifically requested not to send concept design drawings,
details or maquettes. Any concept material received will be
removed from the EOI and will not be considered
No additional supporting material will be viewed (i.e. exhibition

catalogues, media articles)
14.2. Closing Date

All EOI submissions must be received by midnight
Tuesday 10 March 2015 via email to publicart@hobartcity.com.au
Please contact the Public Art Project Manager if you have any
difficulties completing your submission, submitting electronically, or
require any accessibility assistance.
PLEASE NOTE: No late submissions will be accepted.
15.
ENQUIRIES
All enquiries about this Project should be directed in the first instance to
the Project Manger:
Alice Holder
Public Art Coordinator
City of Hobart
Phone: (03) 6238 2845
Email: holdera@hobartcity.com.au
DOCUMENT
20

20/7/2015
6.

6.4

SCHEME 2015
6.4.2
LOT 1, 513 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY CHANGE OF

USE TO CAFE/TAKE-AWAY FOOD PREMISES
PLN-15-00743-01 FILE REF: 2920150/02 & P/513/820
11xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Type of Report
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
27 July 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00743-01
Address:
Lot 1, 513 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Applicant:
NV Investments Tas, 513 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Proposal:
Change of use to cafe/take-away food premises
Representations:
Four
Discretion:
One
1.
Executive Summary
1.1.
Planning approval is sought for a change of use to cafe/take-away food

premises.
1.2.
One (1) discretions was invoked.

1.2.1.
2.
Use
1.3.
Four (4) representations objecting to the proposal were received within the
statutory advertising period of 15 June to 29 June 2015.
1.4.
1.5.
Site Detail
2.1.
The site is part of a stratum titled building on the south western side of Sandy
Bay Road, on its corner with Red Chapel Avenue, Sandy Bay Road. The
subject strata lot is on the northern (city) side of the building and most recently
was used as a clothing shop. The surrounding area is predominantly
residential. The neighbouring tenancy is a hair dressing salon.
Author: Ben Ikin
Lot 1, 513 Sandy Bay Road
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
2.2.
20/7/2015
Refer to Figures below.
Figure 1. A locational image showing the site bordered in blue.
Figure 2. A site image with the site bordered in blue and the subject tenancy identified in red.
Author: Ben Ikin

-2-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Figure 3. A Google streetview image of the subject tenancy, identified by the red square, when it was
operating as a clothing shop.
3.
4.
Proposal
3.1.
The proposal is for a change of use to a caf/take away food premises.
3.2.
No physical works are proposed.
3.3.
The proposal is for 20-25 seats within the internal footprint of 49.6m2,
operating 8am to 6pm on Monday to Saturdays, and 10am to 6pm on
Sundays. The proposal indicates that no hot food will be cooked on the site,
which means no external exhaust fan unit is required. The proposal identifies
that deliveries will not exceed one small van per day (bread), two small trucks
per week (milk and food), and one other truck per month (drinks). The
proposal indicates that one to two employees will be on site at any one time.
3.4.
No outdoor seating is proposed. No outdoor music is proposed. No external

lighting is proposed. No parking is proposed.
Background
4.1.
In January 2010 an application for a change of use to a caf was refused on

this site (PLN-09-01471-01). The application was refused under the City of
Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 because the use was prohibited, and because
the proposal did not meet the requirements of Principle 3 or the parking
schedule.
4.2.
The current proposal was originally submitted by the applicant under the City
of Hobart Planning Scheme 1982 (PLN-15-00487-01). It was advertised and
four objections to it were received. The applicant was advised that on the
basis of the previous refusal and the provisions of the City of Hobart Planning
Scheme 1982 a favourable recommendation was unlikely. The application was
subsequently withdrawn.
4.3.
The application is now submitted under the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme
2015.
Author: Ben Ikin

-3-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
5.

5.1.
Traffic volumes, access and
parking are already issues in this
area and the proposal will
exacerbate the situation and
present a safety concern.
No waste storage area is
proposed.
The proposal will result in an
increase in noise, litter and odour
in the area
Work already seems to have
commenced on site.
There are enough coffee shops
close by already.
The proposal will have an
unacceptable heritage impact.
6.
20/7/2015
The proposal will cause an

increase in detriment to residents.
It appears that this is an identical

application to that previously
withdrawn by the same applicant.
The proposal is out of character
with the surrounding area.
A similar application was refused
by the Council in 2010, and
attracted 16 objections.
The proposal will not benefit the
community.
There are other non-residential
uses that would be more
appropriate for this site.
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within the General Residential Zone of the Hobart City
Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
6.2.
6.3.
6.2.1.
General Residential zone provisions.
6.2.2.
Parking Code provisions.

6.3.1.
Discretion Table
Discretion 1
6.3.2.
Author: Ben Ikin
HIPS
requirement
A caf or take
away food
premises is a
discretionary
use.
Use
Proposed
development
A caf and take
away food
premises are
proposed.
Discretion 1 - Use

-4-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
6.3.2.1.
20/7/2015
In assessing a discretionary use reference is to be had to the zone

purpose, which relevantly provides as follows:
To provide for compatible non-residential uses that primarily serve
the local community.
To provide a high standard of residential amenity.
To allow commercial uses which provide services for the needs of
residents of a neighbourhood and do not displace an
existing residential use or adversely affect their amenity particularly
through noise, traffic generation and movement, and the impact of
demand for on-street parking.
7.
6.3.2.2.
The proposal will utilise an existing non-residential site that was most
recently used as a shop. It is not reasonably feasible to convert the
non-residential premises into a residential premises.
6.3.2.3.
The scale of the proposed use (49.6m2 floor area, 20-25 seats, open
between 8am and 6pm Monday to Saturdays and 10am to 6pm on
Sundays) is considered to be commensurate to the needs of the
neighbourhood and not a bigger, wider catchment.
6.3.2.4.
Similarly the scale of the proposal and the type of food it will be
serving (no cooking of hot food on the premises) are likely to ensure
that any impact on the surrounding residential area will not be
unreasonable. The proposal is exempt from providing on-site car
parking under the provisions of the Parking Code, on the basis that
the floor area is less than 100m2 and that less than 30 seats are
proposed.
6.3.2.5.
In addition to the zone purpose, there are specific non-residential use

standards that must be assessed. These relate to hours of operation,
noise emissions, external lighting and commercial vehicle
movements. The proposal includes documentation which
demonstrates compliance with these requirements.
6.3.2.6.
On this basis the proposal is considered to be consistent with the

zone provisions and to be an appropriate use for the site.
Discussion
7.1.
The proposal is for a small caf/take away food premises in an existing nonresidential building.
7.2.
The proposal complies with the statements and standards applicable to nonresidential uses in the General Residential Zone.
7.3.
The parking Code provides that no onsite parking is required for this use on
the basis that it has a floor area less than 100m2 and has less than 30 seats.
Author: Ben Ikin

-5-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
8.
20/7/2015
7.4.
Although the site is within a Heritage Precinct, the heritage code is not
applicable to changes of use only.
7.5.
The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 recognises that non-residential

uses in residential zones may be appropriate in certain circumstances. In
particular where the proposed use utilises an existing non-residential building
and will be of a scale and nature such that it will primarily serve the local
neighbourhood and not have an unreasonable impact on residential amenity.
The site and proposal are considered to be exactly the type of non-residential
use envisaged as appropriate by the planning scheme.
7.6.
The proposal is recommended for approval on this basis.
Conclusion
8.1.
9.
The proposed change of use to cafe/take-away food premises at Lot 1/513

Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay satisfies the relevant provision of the Hobart
Interim Planning Scheme 2015, and as such is recommended for approval.
Recommendations
approve the application for a change of use to cafe/take-away food
premises at Lot 1, 513 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay for the reasons
outlined in the officers report and a permit containing the following
conditions be issued:
1.

Author: Ben Ikin

-6-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

1.

the commencement of the use.

(Leanne Lassig)

Attachment B Documents
Author: Ben Ikin

-7-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Lot 1, 513 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Description
Application Form
Title
Cover letter
Business plan brief for caf at
513 Sandy bay Road
Author: Ben Ikin
Drawing
15-00743
156217/1
Author: Alberto Vanetti
Date: 12 May 2015
-
Date of
Lodgement to
Council
10 June 2015
10 June 2015
10 June 2015
10 June 2015

-8-
File Ref: 2920150 P/513/820
CPC Agenda
Alberto Vanetti
6 Gardenia Grove
Sandy Bay Road TAS7005
NV Investments TAS Pty Ltd
20/7/2015
avanetti@bigpond.com
PH: 0401420492
DOCUMENT
Tuesday, 12 May 2015
Hobart City Council

Att: Ben Ikin
513 SANDY BAY ROAD CHANGE OF USE
APPLICATION NO. PLN-15-00487-01
Dear to whom it may concerns,

The pre-existing permit allowing use of 513 Sandy Bay Road as 'The Lace Place' is no longer viable as
'The Lace Place' is no longer in existence.
As per business plan brief (attached) the company is proposing a 20 seat, predominately takeaway
coffee shop that is operational only during daylight hours is an appropriate use of 513 Sandy Bay
Road as there will be minimal impact on parking (as there is ample parking present, most of which is
vacant during the day) and no noise that would disrupt the residential neighbours.
This would be a better fit for the residential area as it is a service that is not currently represented in
the area and one that based on discussions the company have had with current neighbours would
be appreciated.
The existing residential neighbourhood includes commercial offices, a real estate office, a child day
care centre, a hair salon and a grocery/deli shop. Therefore there would be no purpose or benefit to
the residential area to use the property for any of the aforementioned purposes. However the
presence of the existing commercial facilities shows that there is a place and need for commercial
properties in the area and a cafe would not be out of place.
There is however no retail zone existing in the direct area so a traditional retail shop that is not
service based seems a poor fit and therefore would also be an unviable business plan economically.
Furthermore the building does not lend itself to a residential use due to its small size, lack of privacy
and amenities that would be required for residential use.
Any attempt to provide the amenities needed to make the property viable for any kind of residential
use would be in no way economically adaptable as bathroom, kitchen, laundry facilities etc. would
have to be installed, any living space left would be minute and therefore in no way would this option
be viable or economical.
Also the property entry is right on the footpath with no off street entry, gate or any other safeguard
that would be deemed suitable for a residential property directly on a busy main road, no other
residential property on the main road close by the has an entrance that opens directly on the
footpath. There is absolutely not land attached to the property or existing off street parking which
further adds to its unsuitability for residential use.
CPC Agenda
Alberto Vanetti
6 Gardenia Grove
Sandy Bay Road TAS7005
NV Investments TAS Pty Ltd
20/7/2015
avanetti@bigpond.com
PH: 0401420492
The property is also not suited for use as consulting rooms, a community centre, a hospital, a place
of worship, an educational establishment or active recreation, due again to its small size, lack of land
and/or off street parking attached. Conversion to any such uses is also not economically adaptable.
Please contact me if you have any queries in relation to this letter.
Yours Faithfully
Alberto Vanetti
Managing Director
NV Investments Pty Ltd
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
PROPOSED COFFEE SHOP USE - Planning Interim Scheme ConditionsTo the best of our knowledge and ability, the proposed change of use to small coffee shop will comply with all the criteria
below and it will not have any impact on the residential amenity.
Objectives:
To Ensure That non-residential use does not unreasonably impact residential amenity.
SOLUTIONS
Proposed hours of operation:
PERFORMANCE CRITERIA
P1
MON FRI
8am to 6pm
Hours of operation must not have unreasonable impact upon

the residential amenity through commercial vehicle
movements, noise or other emissions that are unreasonable
in their timing, duration or extent.
SAT
8am to 6pm
SUN
10am to 4pm
Noise emission will not exceed the following:
(a) 55dB(A) (LAeq) between the hours of 8am to 6pm
(b) 5dB (A) above the background (LA90) level or
40dB(A) (LAeq), whichever is lower, between
6pm to 8am;
(c) 65dB(A) (LAmax) at any time.
P2
Noise Emission measured at the boundary of the site must
not cause environmental harm.
Also, the proposed use will not require any of the

following, which could impact on the noise level of the area,
which are already affected by high traffic movement of
Sandy Bay Road.
NOT PROPOSED or REQUIRED:
(a) External cooking ventilation unit;
(b) External Air conditioning Unit;
(c) External Music;
(d) Outdoor facilities.
P3
The proposed use will not require any external lighting
which will affect the adjacent dwellings.
External Lighting must not adversely affect existing or

future residential amenity, having regard to all of the
following:
(a) Level of illumination and duration of lighting;
(b) Distance to habitable rooms in an adjacent
dwelling.
P4
The propose use, will only require small delivery van, during
the hours between 8am to 6pm MON-FRI as per following:
(a) 1 Small delivery van per day;
(b) 2 small delivery vans per week;
(c) 1 small delivery van per month.
The above commercial movements will not have any impact
on the level of traffic on the road and will not affect any
existing parking due to the rare and short frequency of the
deliveries.
DOCUMENT
Commercial vehicle movements, (including loading and

unloading and garbage removal) must not result in
unreasonable adverse impact upon residential amenity
having regard to all of the following:
(a) The time and duration of commercial vehicle
movements;
(b) The number and frequency of commercial vehicle
movements;
(c) The size of commercial vehicles involved;
(d) The ability of the site to accommodate commercial
vehicle turning movements, including the amount
of reversing (including associated warning noise);
(e) Noise reducing structures between vehicle
movement areas and dwellings;
(f) The level of traffic on the road;
(g) The potential for conflicts with other traffic.

20/7/2015
6.

6.4

SCHEME 2015
6.4.3
16 REYNOLDS COURT, DYNNYRNE CHANGE OF USE TO

RESIDENTIAL (BOARDING HOUSE) PLN-15-00632-01
FILE REF: 5638329 & P/16/967
25xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DES-F-0102/52
12/05/2015
Type of Report
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
29 July 2015
Application No:
PLN-15-00632-01
Address:
16 Reynolds Court, Dynnyrne
Applicant:
Frank Hock, 39 Mortimer Avenue, Mount Stuart
Proposal:
Change of use to residential (boarding house)
Representations:
Discretion:
Parking
1.
Executive Summary
1.1.
Planning approval is sought for change of use to residential (boarding house)
1.2.
One (1) discretions were invoked.

1.2.1.
Parking
1.3.
Four (4 ) representations objecting to the proposal was received within the

statutory advertising period from the 2 June 2015 to the 18 June 2015
1.4.
1.5.
Author: Tristan Widdowson
16 Reynolds Court
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
2.
20/7/2015
Site Detail
The 1005m2 lot contains an existing 255m2 two storey house centrally located on the
site. The site is accessed via an existing driveway running parallel to Reynolds Court,
Dynnyrne. The driveway also provides access to 14 Reynolds Court via right of way
over the subject site. The rear of the site adjoins the Southern Outlet.
2.1.
Site Photos
Plate:1 Entrance to 16 & 14 Reynolds Court
16 Reynolds Court
-2-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Plate: 2 Existing parking area of 16 Reynolds Court and dwelling beyond
Plate: 3 Driveway looking towards 16 Reynolds Court
Plate: 4 Driveway looking towards 14 Reynolds Court
16 Reynolds Court
-3-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
3.
The proposal is for the change of use of the existing 255m2 two storey house
at 16 Reynolds Court to a boarding house. The dwelling contains two
bedrooms, laundry and toilet on the ground level with the upper level
containing four bedrooms, living room, kitchen and bathroom with all facilities
to be shared amongst the residents. It is proposed that three of the bedrooms
have single beds and three have double beds to accommodate couples if
required. It is intended that the rooms are rented individually with the aim of
providing student accommodation.
Background
4.1.
5.
20/7/2015
Proposal
3.1.
4.
Council were made aware of potential building works and the use of the
property requiring approval. It was confirmed that the use of the property for
shared accommodation would require building and planning approval. It is
stated that the property has been used as student accommodation for some
time with the previous owner utilising the UTAS accommodation service to
provide leasing to students.

5.1.
The following table outlines the main issues raised by the four representors.
All concerns raised with respect to the discretions invoked by the proposal will
be addressed in Section 6 of this report.
My objection to the above is that,
This change of use is not
experience has shown that the
harmonious with the adjacent
occupants of no. 16 Reynolds
residential uses. It has significantly
Court, park their cars on the street
reduced the amenity we are
as there is insufficient parking
entitled to as residents in this
spaces provided on the premises,
area. There are sufficient
therefore, it takes up a lot of street
opportunities for this type of
parking that the neighbourhood
development in other areas where
needs to have for its own visitors
the scheme allows such as on
and trades people (including
campus accommodations as well
delivery people).
as off campus such as Jane
Franklin Hall, 56 King Street and
the new development at 46
Melville Street. There is an
expectation in a residential area
that a use of this density
along with transient residents does
not impact upon the amenity and
harmony of a residential area. This
use will and does have a direct
impact upon the adjacent
residents,
16 Reynolds Court
-4-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The existing parking arrangements As Reynolds Court is a one way

street, parking is restricted to the
for the property are already
left hand side of the road only, and
substandard. The
further restricted due to driveway
application form indicates there
access to the properties facing
are 2 existing carparks on site.
Reynolds Court, therefore, parking
This is true but the proposal only
becomes an issue for the
indicates 1 carpark onsite (with no
neighbourhood.
indication of provision for disabled
persons). The ability to turn a car
around is limited on the existing
and proposed use do not believe
the current or proposed car
parking meets the
intent/requirement of the planning
scheme. The driveway does not
allow for legal stormwater
drainage, the site lines when
exiting the driveway do not meet
the required standards. This has
not been indicated on the
proposed plans. The plans
provided for the parking and
access provided are not an
accurate indication of the actual
site dimensions of the driveway
and the car parking. The parking
area on 16 Reynolds Court is not
a 7m square area as shown on the
proposed plans. It is narrows to a
width of approximately 6 metres.
The right of way is also incorrectly
detailed on the proposed plans.
The site plans also does not
accurately depict the true
conditions on site and nor are they
consistent with the title dimensions
for the lot and the right of way.
I myself have developed a
There is enough land on the
physical disability due to old age
premises at 16 Reynolds Court, to
and my domestic helpers do not
provide such parking for its guests
wish to park their cars down the
and their visitors.
road (including on Proctors Road)
and walk up the road to attend to
my needs.
16 Reynolds Court
-5-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The acceptable solution for the

Parking is a serious concern for
parking in this use is one space
the area already. Reynolds Court
per three occupants. The
is a one way street where parking
application shows nine residents,
is only permitted on the left side of
therefore three carparks (one
the road. There are several
disabled) a six bedroom house
houses on both sides of the street
is quite capable of
who already utilise the roadway for
accommodating 12 persons quite
parking. With the close proximity
easily there is nothing to stop
to the university there are often
future use being increased to
impacts during the day from
higher occupancy numbers up-to
people utilising the street for
12 (which is the Building
parking who are not residents,
Code maximum for a Class 1b
such as university students.
building, which is the intended
Building Code Classification).
Therefore the property should be
expected to provide at least 4
carparks onsite (one disabled).
One carpark should also be
disabled access compliant
(therefore an additional access
space adjacent to the disabled
access carpark essentially the
same area as five carparks should
be provided onsite). I do not think
it is acceptable to utilise the street
as overflow for the proposed use
as it is already at a high capacity
of use perhaps a traffic impact
assessment may suggest
otherwise this may satisfy
Part E6.5 of the Hobart Interim
Planning Scheme 2015. The
already prevalent parking overspill
causes regular driveway
obstruction to the access for 16
and 14 Reynolds
Court, Dynnyrne.
The plans do not meet the
Further to the Hobart Interim
acceptable solution set out in
Planning Scheme 2015
Code E6.0 and I do not see
requirements, the implications
how the plans suitably
associated with the Disabled
demonstrate / or if the site is even
Access are significant. The
possible to meet the performance
planning scheme requires a
criteria of Code E6.0 of the Hobart
disabled accessible carpark. From
Interim Planning Scheme 2015:
this carpark it is not possible nor
demonstrated how access will be
provided to and within the
dwelling.
16 Reynolds Court
-6-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
I do not believe the design of

the vehicular access complies
with Code E6.7.2
any attempt to do so is an
impact upon the residents of
both 14 and 16 Reynolds
Court if works were to be
required to alter any part of 16
Reynolds Court. I
would expect that the current
illegal occupancy could not
continue;
I believe the development
should be provided with a
passing bay as it potentially
serves more than 5 vehicles,
when parking spaces available
to 14 Reynolds are considered
along with 16 Reynolds Court.
as they share the 1 access;
It is not possible to provide
compliant onsite turning
without encroaching onto the
property of 14 Reynolds Court
(where there is no right of way
provided for the
benefit of 16 Reynolds Court.);
The plans do not seem to
demonstrate compliance with
Code E6.7.5;
The driveway surface
treatment is not compliant
with Code E6.7.6;
Car parking is sighted in front
of the building line;
I do not believe the access to
the road meets the
requirements of Code
E6.7.14;
The number of carparks
provided (when you consider
a disable carpark is to be
provided) is well short of the
requirements of Code E6.0.
20/7/2015
In addition the Building Act 2000

requires this use - being a Class
1b boarding house - to be
provide with disabled access, from
the street to the building and
within all common areas
of the building, one room for
sleeping and an accessible
bathroom facility.
I believe the building surveyor has
erred by issuing an occupancy
permit for the 1b use,
without consideration of these
items and I believe council would
be liable to issue a permit for a
use which does not and cannot
meet disabled access
requirements set out by other
legislation such as the Building Act
2000, the Premises Standard and
the Disability Discrimination Act.
The plans do not demonstrate any
consideration for disabled person
at all.
No disabled pedestrian access
from the street;
No designated disabled
parking facility;
No disabled access ramps of
lift from the street/car parking
to the dwelling;
No indication of a disabled
accessible bathroom facility
within the dwelling;
Plans do not demonstrate
disabled compliant access
within all common areas of
the dwelling; and
Nor do they demonstrate an
allocated disabled accessible
bedroom is to be
provided.
In addition to this the approval of
such use (as currently proposed)
may be considered discriminatory
under the provision of the
Premises Standard and the
Disability Discrimination Act.
16 Reynolds Court
-7-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
With the current illegal property

Clients, residents and boarders
use occupation of No.16 as a
together with tradesmen and
boarding house of six bedrooms
associated delivery vehicles have
with potentially of up to twelve or
encroached on the right-ofmore resident transient persons
carriageway on numerous
(far in excess of from what one
occasions, causing
would normally associate with a
inconvenience and stress to my
"residential" classified property)
son and his family and their
there is and will be a continued
visitors. At times transient
lack of sufficient parking and also
occupant vehicles have even been
the ability to turn vehicles around
found in trespass by being actually
is limited on the existing and
parked on the forecourt parking
proposed use for transient
area.
occupant vehicles that may be
expected as usage from and by
The increased number of transient
those numbers.
occupant traffic movements to and
Also the street parking required for
from the car parking area on No16
such a number of expected
is not inconsiderable and has
transient occupant boarders
continually impacted and
(and indeed number of illegal
encroached on the property and
transient occupants at this time
the right-of-carriageway thereto.
and in the past through the
There have been occasions when
past and current illegal use of the
my sons family has not been able
premises) :to access or egress their
residence and have been
reduces the parking amenity
inconvenienced by delays and the
for the residential dwellings in
need to at times plead for the
the area, as Reynolds
clearing of the right of way, which
Court is a one way street with
they are expected to be able to
on street parking restricted to
legally traffic unhindered at all
left side of the street.
times. The mental stress
associated with this has been
restricts the parking amenity
somewhat significant and
for both the residents of existing
upsetting to my family and
zoned "Residential"
particularly my grand children. As
properties in Reynolds Court
a family with young children they
and Procters Road properties
are constantly worried they will not
with rear access from
be able to leave the property in the
Reynolds Court.
event should an emergency
situation arise.
parking as it exists at this time
in Reynolds Court - is already
over reasonably
expected normal limits.
6.
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within the Inner Residential Zone of the Hobart Interim
6.2.
16 Reynolds Court
-8-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
6.3.
20/7/2015
6.2.1.
11.2 Use Table
6.2.2.
E6.6.1 Number of Car Parking Spaces

6.3.1.
Discretion Table
Discretion 1
HIPS
requirement
E6.6.1 Number
of Car Parking
Spaces
Table E6.1
requires one for
each staff
member and
one for every
three licensed
residents.
Proposed
development
The site
contains 2
existing on-site
car parking
spaces.
The proposed
maximum
capacity is for
nine residents
therefore the
on-site car
parking
requirement is
three spaces.
6.3.2.
Discretion 1 - Parking
Table E6.1 requires one car parking for each staff member and one
for every three licensed residents. The boarding house can, based
on the beds provided, accommodate a maximum of nine residents.
There is not intended to be any staff members on the site. The
Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 requirement is for three car
parking spaces. There are two existing on-site car parking spaces.
Therefore there is a shortfall of one car parking space. The Hobart
Interim Planning Scheme 2015 states the following performance
criteria against which the shortfall of one parking space needs to be
assessed:
(a)
car parking demand;
(b)
the availability of on-street and public car parking in the locality;
(c)
the availability and frequency of public transport within a 400 m

walking distance of the site;
(d)
the availability and likely use of other modes of transport;
16 Reynolds Court
-9-
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
(e)
the availability and suitability of alternative arrangements for

car parking provision;
(f)
any reduction in car parking demand due to the sharing of

car parking spaces by multiple uses, either because of
variation of car parking demand over time or because of
efficiencies gained from the consolidation of shared car
parking spaces;
(g)
any car parking deficiency or surplus associated with the

existing use of the land;
(h)
any credit which should be allowed for a car parking demand

deemed to have been provided in association with a use
which existed before the change of parking requirement,
except in the case of substantial redevelopment of a site;
(i)
the appropriateness of a financial contribution in lieu of parking

towards the cost of parking facilities or other transport facilities,
where such facilities exist or are planned in the vicinity;
(j)
any verified prior payment of a financial contribution in lieu of

parking for the land;
(k)
any relevant parking plan for the area adopted by Council;
(l)
the impact on the historic cultural heritage significance of the

site if subject to the Local Heritage Code;
(m)
whether the provision of the parking would result in the loss,

directly or indirectly, of one or more significant trees listed in
the Significant Trees Code.
The description of the proposal that accompanied the application states that
the accommodation for international university students who arrive in Hobart
with very little contacts or transport capacity. The propertys location is within
walking distance to the University of Tasmanias main campus as well as the
Sandy Bay shopping precinct.
It is also approximately 100 metres from Proctors Road which is a relatively
well serviced bus route. The information provided with the application also
states that bicycles and shopping carts are provided for the convenience of its
residents.
The applicant has advised that currently only one resident has a vehicle and
upcoming students booked in for next year has not indicated that they have a
vehicle. Obviously this ratio could vary in the future however; it is indicative of
the vehicular requirements of the residents considering the type of
accommodation the property provides for. The carparking demand for the site
does on face value meet the demand required by the performance criteria (a)
above.
16 Reynolds Court
- 10 -
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
It is noted that on-street parking in Reynolds Court is limited to one side of the
road. Nevertheless there is capacity in close proximity to accommodate the
one caparking space shortfall and comply with the performance criteria (b)
above. The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 does not require further
assessment of the availability of on street parking for any more than one
space.
The site is within 100 metres of Proctors Road which is a Metro bus route. As
such clause (c) of the performance criteria above it met. As mentioned above
the tenants will have access to bicycles and the campus and other facilities
are within walking distance. The performance criteria (d) are considered to be
met.
The other performance criteria are not relevant to the assessment of the minor
shortfall in parking for the site
The proposal is considered to meet Clause E6.6.1 of the Hobart Interim
Planning Scheme 2015. As such the discretion can be exercised and the
application approved.
7.
Discussion
7.1.
The proposal includes the change of use to of the existing dwelling at 16

Reynolds Court to a boarding house for shared student accommodation. The
proposed use is a permitted in the zone with the only discretion relating to an
on-site car parking deficiency of one space.
7.2.
There were four representations received raising the following main concerns:
(i) The change of use is not consistent with the adjoining residential uses and
will impact on their amenity.
(ii) The past and potential future impacts and obstruction of the right of way
passing through the property.
(iii) The lack of the provision of disabled parking on site.
(iv) The existing parking area not complying with the development standards
for parking and access.
(v) The insufficient amount of on-site car parking for the use impacting on the
existing car parking in the area and not meeting the Performance Criteria
of clause E6.6.1 Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 considers the use as residential
and is therefore a permitted use in the zone. The potential impacts are
considered comparable to any other rental share house with the behaviour of
the tenants being the determining factor. The subject property offers an
involved level of management that would not be existent in a regular shared
rental property.
16 Reynolds Court
- 11 -
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The issue in respect of the right of way is a private matter beyond the
Councils control however; it is considered that the owner would alert tenants
to the requirement to keep it unobstructed. It is noted that there is a no
standing sign located on the retaining wall adjoining the right of way.
In respect of the requirement for disabled parking that is a matter for the
building surveyor. The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 doesnt have a
requirement for disabled parking specifically as such but instead states that
when car parking spaces are provided for people with a disability they must
satisfy the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia.
The representor is of the assertion that the development standards for parking
and access should be retrospectively applied to the development however;
this is not the case as there is no proposed variation or works to the existing
car parking area and access.
In terms of the insufficient amount of on-site car parking the discretion of one
car parking space was assessed as meeting the relevant performance criteria
of clause E6.6.1 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015. For more detail
refer to the assessment of the discretion under Section 6 of the report.
7.3.
8.
Essentially, the only discretion in respect of the application comes from the
applicants choice to provide bedding within three of the rooms, suitable of
accommodating couples. Therefore whether the capacity is utilised or not may
vary in respect of the number of residents. However based on the maximum
potential capacity created by the double beds there is a possibility of nine
residents therefore taking the requirement from two car parking spaces to
three. In assessing the discretion of the one car parking space it was
determined that due to the nature of the use and accommodation, proposed
location in close proximity to the University campus, services, public transport
and the availability of on-street car parking that the discretion is considered to
satisfy the relevant provisions of the Performance Criteria for E6.6.1 Hobart
Interim Planning Scheme 2015. Therefore the proposal is recommended for
approval subject to a condition requiring a maximum of nine residents, to
clarify the scope of the permit.
Conclusion
8.1.
The proposed change of use to residential (boarding house) at 16 Reynolds

Court, Dynnyrne satisfies the relevant provisions of the Hobart Interim
Planning Scheme 2015, and as such is recommending for approval.
16 Reynolds Court
- 12 -
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
9.
20/7/2015
Recommendations
approve the application for a change of use to residential (boarding house)
at 16 Reynolds Court, Dynnyrne for the reasons outlined in the officers
report and a permit containing the following conditions be issued:
1.

2.
The boarding house is to have a maximum capacity of nine

residents.

1.


(Leanne Lassig)
Date of Report: 08/07/15
16 Reynolds Court
- 13 -
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

16 Reynolds Court, DYNNYRNE
Description
Application Form
Title
Floor Plans
ROW Plan
Property Description
History
Drawing
CT250524/1
16 Reynolds Court
- 14 -
Date of
Lodgement to
Council
22/05/15
22/05/15
22/05/15
22/05/15
22/05/15
22/05/15
File Ref: 5638329 P/16/967
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015

20/7/2015
6.

6.4

SCHEME 2015
6.4.4
827 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY SIGNAGE

PLN-15-00549-01 FILE REF: 5645721 & P/827/820
12xs
(Council)
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Type of Report
Council
Committee:
20 July 2015
Council:
27 July 2015
Expiry Date:
21 July 2015 (Extension granted until 1 September 2015)
Application No:
PLN-15-00549-01
Address:
827 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Applicant:
Tasmanian Land Conservancy, PO Box 2112, Sandy Bay
Proposal:
Signage
Representations:
Nil
Discretion:
Heritage, Signage
1.
2.
Executive Summary
1.1.
Planning approval is sought for the relocation of an existing1500mm x 740mm

sign.
1.2.
Two (2 ) discretions were invoked.

1.2.1.
Heritage
1.2.2.
Signage
1.3.
No representations were received within the statutory advertising period 19

June 3 July 2015
1.4.
1.5.
Site Detail
Author: Deanne Lang
827 Sandy Bay Road
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
3.
20/7/2015
Proposal
3.1.
Planning approval is sought to relocate the existing 1500mm x 740mm metal

sign towards the road frontage of the property at 827 Sandy Bay Road.
3.2.
The height to the base of the sign will be a maximum of 900 mm above natural
ground level, resulting in a total height of 1640mm above natural ground level.
3.3.
The sign will not be illuminated.
Existing sign to be relocated
Existing sign
Proposed new location
4.
Background
4.1.
The sign will be erected on a parcel of land at 827 Sandy Bay Road, which is
owned and maintained by the Council.
Author: Deanne Lang
827 Sandy Bay Road

-2-
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
5.
20/7/2015
Representations
5.1.
6.
No representations were received within the statutory advertising period (19

June 3 July 2015)
Assessment
6.1.
The site is located within the Environmental Management Zone of the Hobart
City Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
6.2.
6.3.
6.2.1.
Signs Code
6.2.2.
Historic Heritage Code

6.3.1.
Author: Deanne Lang
Discretion Table
Discretion 1
Signs Code
Discretion 2
Signs Code
Discretion 3
Heritage
827 Sandy Bay Road

-3-
HIPS
requirement
A pole/pylon
sign are a
discretionary
sign in the
Environmental
Management
Zone.
The sign must
have a
clearance from
the ground to
the sign no less
than 2400mm.
The property is
listed in E13.0
Hobart City
Interim Planning
Scheme 2015.
Historic
Heritage Code
of the. Signs are
not an exempt
development
under E.13.4
Proposed
development
A pole/pylon
sign is
proposed.
The sign has a

clearance from
the ground to
the sign of
900mm.
A pole/pylon
sign is
proposed.
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
6.3.2.
20/7/2015
Discretion 1 The sign is a pole/pylon sign and is defined under clause E17.3 of
the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 as:
means a sign erected on a pole, poles or pylon independent of any
building, provided it is not designed or used as a poster panel
(billboard).
To be approved, the proposal must meet the requirements of
E.17.6.1 or if the acceptable solution cannot be met, it is required to
comply with the corresponding performance criteria.
The sign does not meet E.17.6.1 A1 which states that the sign must
be a permitted sign in Table E.17.3.
A pole/pylon sign is a discretionary sign in the Environmental
Management Zone under Table E17.3 and therefore complies with
the requirements of E.17.6.1 P1.
6.3.3.
Discretion 2 Clause 17.7.1 of the Hobart City Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
establishes the development standards for new signs.
Under Table E17.2 of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015 a
pole/pylon sign must comply with the following standards:
(a) Height to the highest point of the sign above ground no more
than 5000mm;
(b)
Clearance from ground to sign no less than 2400mm;
(c)
Projects no more than 1200mm beyond the boundary with the

footpath or road reservation.
(d)
Area of each face no more than 2m2.
The proposed sign has a maximum clearance from the ground to the
base of the sign of 900mm and therefore the sign does not comply
with the standards listed in Table 17.2.
As stated above, the sign is not a permitted sign in Table E17.3.
A sign which does not meet the signage standards or is not a
permitted sign in the zone must be assessed and comply against the
following performance criteria specified under E.17.7.1 P1 of the
Hobart City Interim Planning Scheme 2015. which states:
(a)
Author: Deanne Lang
be integrated into the design of the premises and streetscape

so as to be attractive and informative without dominating the
building or streetscape
827 Sandy Bay Road

-4-
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
(b)
be of appropriate dimensions so as not to dominate the

streetscape or premises on which it is located;
(c)
be constructed of materials which are able to be maintained in a

satisfactory manner at all times;
(d)
not result in loss of amenity to neighbouring properties;
(e)
not involve the repetition of messages or information on the

same street frontage;
(f)
not contribute to or exacerbate visual clutter;
(g)
not cause a safety hazard.
The sign subject to this application, is single sided and understated in

its design and will not be illuminated. The sign is relatively small at
1.1m2 in area and will not dominate the streetscape. The sign is
adjacent to a commercial property and will not result in a loss of
amenity to this or any other neighbouring property.
The sign is the sole sign capable of being viewed from off the site
and therefore there is no visual clutter or repetition of messages.
The aim of the relocation is to provide more clear entry point to the
use of the site.
The proposal meets the performance criteria set out in E.17.7.1 P1 of
the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015.
6.34
Discretion 3
The property is listed as a heritage place in Table E.13.1 of the
Historic Heritage Code. Signs are not exempt from being considered
under this code.
Under E17.7.2 of the Signage Code, there are no acceptable
solutions for signs on Heritage Places subject to the Heritage Code.
Therefore the application was assessed against the Performance
Criteria outlined within E.17.7.2 P1 which states:
A sign on a Heritage Place listed in the Historic Heritage Code or
within a Heritage Precinct or Cultural Landscape Precinct must
satisfy all of the following:
Author: Deanne Lang
(a)
be located in a manner that minimises impact on cultural heritage

significance of the place or precinct;
(b)
be placed so as to allow the architectural details of the building to remain

prominent;
(c)
be of a size and design that will not substantially diminish the cultural
heritage significance of the place or precinct;
827 Sandy Bay Road

-5-
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
(d)
be placed in a location on the building that would traditionally have been

used as an advertising area if possible;
(e)
not dominate or obscure any historic signs forming an integral part of a

buildings architectural detailing or cultural heritage values;
(f)
have fixtures that do not damage historic building fabric, including but not
restricted to attachments to masonry and wood, such as to using
non-corrosive fixings inserted in mortar joints;
(g)
not project above an historic parapet or roof line if such a projection

impacts on the cultural heritage significance of the building;
(h)
be of a graphic design that minimises modern trademark or proprietary

logos not sympathetic to heritage character;
(i)
not use internal illumination in a sign on a Heritage Place unless it is

demonstrated that such illumination will not detract from the character and
The application was referred to the Councils Cultural Heritage

Officer who provided the following comment:
The proposed sign relocation will have no adverse impact upon
the places cultural heritage attributes. If anything, appreciation
of the setting of the old Pearce house, Kapunda, will be
enhanced.
The sign is to be relocated closer to the coach house building
which formerly accommodated the Model Tudor Village. This
building dates from the 1980s and is of negligible heritage
value.
7.
8.
Discussion
7.1.
It is proposed to relocate an existing 1500mm x 740mm sign at 827 Sandy

Bay Road, Sandy Bay.
7.2.
The application is discretionary as the site has been identified as a heritage

place under Table E.13.1 of the Historic Heritage Code, is a discretionary sign
in the Environmental Management Zone and does not meet the signage
standards for a pole/pylon sign.
7.3.
The application has been referred to the Councils Cultural Heritage Officer
who supports the application.
7.4.
The sign is considered to meet the relevant performance criteria and it is

recommended that it be approved by the Council.
Conclusion
8.1.
The proposed signage at 827 Sandy Bay Road satisfies the relevant
provisions of the Hobart Interim Planning Scheme 2015, and as such is
recommended for approval.
Author: Deanne Lang
827 Sandy Bay Road

-6-
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
9.
20/7/2015
Recommendations
approve the application for a signage at 827 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
for the reasons outlined in the officers report and a permit containing the
following conditions be issued:
1.

1.

the sign requires approval under the Building Act 2000. Where
the installation of the signage.

(Leanne Lassig)

Author: Deanne Lang
827 Sandy Bay Road

-7-
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

827 Sandy Bay Road, Sandy Bay
Description
Drawing
Application Form
Title
Lot 1 on Diagram 40719
Site Plan
Photo of existing sign
showing dimensions
Photo showing the location of
the proposed sign
Photo showing current position
of the sign
Email stating the maximum
height of the sign above
natural ground level
Author: Deanne Lang
827 Sandy Bay Road

-8-
Date of Lodgement
to Council
19 May 2015
19 May 2015
19 May 2015
19 May 2015
19 May 2015
19 May 2015
17 June 2015
File Ref: 5645721 P/827/820
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
DOCUMENT
20/7/2015

20/7/2015
7.
LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS AMENDMENT (TASMANIAN

PLANNING SCHEME) BILL 2015 FILE REF: 16-11-2
51xs
Report of the Director City Planning and the Manager Planning Policy and Heritage of
13 July 2015 and attachments.
DELEGATION:
Committee
CPC Agenda
Item No. 7 / Page No. 1
20/7/2015
TO
General Manager
FROM
Manager Planning Policy and Heritage
DATE
13 July, 2015
SUBJECT
LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS AMENDMENT

(TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME) BILL 2015
FILE
S16-011-02 JMC (s:\projects\legislation\lupaa amendments 2015\report for committee july15.docx)
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
This report considers the exposure draft of the Land Use Planning and
Approvals Amendment (Tasmanian Planning Scheme) Bill 2015 (the Bill) and
seeks endorsement from Council of a letter to the Department of Justice in
response to an invitation to comment on the Bill.
2.
BACKGROUND
2.1.
The Government is undertaking a suite of planning reforms intended to;

provide a fairer, faster, cheaper and simpler planning system for Tasmania.
2.2.
The first reforms were delivered in 2014 with the passage of changes to the
Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA) to streamline the
processes for finalising interim schemes and amending planning schemes, and
for a range of measures to improve the planning system.
2.3.
Comments on the draft Bill are sought by 10th August 2015.
3.
PROPOSAL
3.1.
The proposal is that the letter to the Department of Justice set out as
Attachment A to this report be endorsed.
4.
THE BILL
4.1.
The Bill replaces the current LUPAA provisions for local planning schemes
with provisions for a new Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
4.2.
The draft Bill gives effect to a proposed structure for the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme that consists of a set of statewide planning controls (State Planning
Provisions) and Local Provisions Schedules that contain the Local Planning
Provisions including the zone and overlay maps for each local area.
4.3.
The current provisions for planning directives and planning schemes (including
interim directives and interim schemes) will be replaced with new provisions
for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
4.4.
The State Planning Provisions and the relevant Local Provisions Schedule will
together form all of the planning controls that apply to a local area (the local
application of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme). These will be administered by
local planning authorities.
4.5.
Specifically, the Bill:

4.5.1.
Provides for the making of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, including

separate processes for the making of the State Planning Provisions and
the Local Provisions Schedules;
4.5.2.
Provides for amendments to the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, including

separate processes for amending the State Planning Provisions and the
Local Provisions Schedules;
4.5.3.
Includes a range of amendments to ensure the provisions of LUPAA are

consistent with the new structure for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme;
4.5.4.
Provides transitional arrangements to allow the current planning

schemes to operate until the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in place in
a municipal area and for other matters, including any permits being
dealt with under the current planning schemes when the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme comes into force in that municipal area.
4.6.
The Bill also introduces a 21-day statutory timeframe for assessing permitted
use and development applications when the Tasmanian Planning Scheme takes
effect.
4.7.
The State Planning Provisions will include the use and development standards
for each zone and a suite of statewide codes. They will also include the purpose
and objectives of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme and administrative
provisions, including a template for the Local Provisions Schedules.
4.8.
Local Provisions will include the zone and overlay maps that apply these
standards spatially, and any approved local variations. They will also include a
local purpose and objectives and any particular purpose zones, specific area
plans and additional local controls that may be required.
4.9.
The State Planning Provisions will provide some flexibility for the use of Local
Provisions to address local planning issues where planning merit can be
demonstrated. Criteria will apply to provide certainty as to when Local
Provisions can be used.
4.10. Further information in relation to the rationale for the Bill can be found in the
Position Paper Legislation for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme (Attachment
B) and in 4 facts sheets (Attachment C). The Bill itself (190 pages) is available
online at http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/community-consultation/new-tasmanianplanning-scheme .
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 2 of 9
CPC Agenda
5.
20/7/2015
DISCUSSION
General
5.1.
It is considered that the Bill as drafted will meet the Governments aim of
introducing a set of statewide planning controls and local provisions and
provide for their amendment into the future. The processes set up under the Bill
are similar to those provided at the moment in LUPAA for the introduction and
amendment of planning schemes.
5.2.
Planning authorities will continue to be able to initiate amendments to their

Local Provisions Schedules. It is proposed this will follow the current
amendment processes under the Act, including the combined permit and
amendment process. Planning authorities will not be able to modify the content
of the State Planning Provisions.
5.3.
The success or otherwise of the Governments objective; to make Tasmanias

planning system fairer, faster, cheaper and simpler will largely depend upon
the State Planning Provisions themselves rather than anything contained in the
draft Bill. At this stage of the process it appears that the Bill is simply a
rearrangement of the deck chairs. The only element of the Bill that makes part
of the system faster is the proposed reduction in the timeframe for assessing
permitted use and development from 28 days to 21 days.
5.4.
The impact of the Bill on good planning outcomes at the local level will also
not become obvious until the State Planning Provisions and the criteria for
when Local Provisions can be used are drafted.
Legislative drafting
5.5.
When the amending Bill is 190 pages for an Act that is 145 pages and section
numbers extend to 47ZX consideration needs to be given to whether or not it
would be better to replace the Act in its entirety in the interests of both
understanding the amendments and simplification of the Act itself.
State Policies
5.6.
It is noted in the Position Paper that once the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in
place, the Government will consult with local government, stakeholders and the
community on a suite of new state planning policies and that the new state
planning policies will inform a review of Tasmanias three regional land use
strategies and the first review of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
5.7.
The preparation of additional state policies is supported however it is

disappointing that these policies have not been prepared in time to inform the
drafting of the State Planning Provisions. It is unfortunate that the drive for
consistency has taken precedence over policy development.
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 3 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Regional Land Use Strategies

5.8.
The Bill provides that the Minister may declare a regional land use strategy for
each regional area and must keep these strategies under regular and periodic
review.
5.9.
The continued recognition of the important role of the regional land use
strategies in guiding strategic planning and the spatial application of zones
across the State in the Bill is supported.
5.10. Both the Position Paper and the Bill are silent on how the regional land use
strategies will be kept under regular and periodic review by the Minister. It is
considered that a timeframe and process for review should be included in the
legislation in order to provide a level of confidence that such reviews will be
conducted and a process followed that allows for consultation with the
community and planning authorities.
Review of State Provisions
5.11. The Bill provides that that the Minister will be required to keep the State
Planning Provisions under regular and periodic review.
5.12. Again both the Position Paper and the Bill are silent on how the State Planning
Provisions will be kept under regular and periodic review by the Minister. It is
conducted and a process followed that allows for consultation with the
community and planning authorities.
5.13. In relation to review of the State Planning Provisions the Position Paper does
state; The statutory framework does not prevent any person from requesting
that the Minister consider developing a State Planning Provision to address a
particular issue, on an administrative basis. The Minister would then need to
determine whether preparation of such a State Planning Provision is desirable
before any further work could proceed.
5.14. Such an approach to review of the State Provisions is ad hoc and does not
provide for issues related to implementation of the State Provisions to be
addressed in a consistent and comprehensive manner.
5.15. Section 47(5) provides that a planning authority, when reporting to the
Commission following exhibition of a Local Provisions Schedule must not
include a recommendation that a State Planning provision be altered. Section
47ZB(5) provides the same restriction in relation to amendments to a Local
Provisions Schedule. Such restrictions are considered unreasonable when
deficiencies in the State Provisions are identified through the exhibition
process.
5.16. Planning authorities will be responsible for administration of the State Planning
Provisions and will be best placed to identify issues in their implementation. To
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 4 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
have a situation where there is no formal process for planning authorities to

suggest amendments to the State Planning Provisions is not in the interests of
having a planning system that is fairer, faster and simpler.
5.17. The regular and periodic review of the State Planning Provisions should provide
a process for planning authorities to suggest aspects of the Provisions that
should be reviewed.
Provision of Draft Local provisions
5.18. Section 41 of the Bill provides that the Minister may direct a planning authority
to provide a draft Local Provisions Schedule to the Commission within a
minimum period of 42 days. This time frame is not sufficient for the initial
Local Provisions Schedule to be drafted and then considered and endorsed by
Council. A 90 day period would be more realistic.
Review of Local Provisions Schedule
5.19. Section 47H of the Bill requires planning authorities to keep their Local
Provisions Schedules under regular review in accordance with the process set
out in the draft Bill and states the purpose of the review. Again the period of
the regular review is not specified.
5.20. The process for reviewing planning schemes will require planning authorities to
seek public comment for a minimum of 21 days and submit a report to the
Commission including the planning authoritys opinion as to whether the
Schedule requires amendment or replacement or can continue in its current
form. It would be appropriate for a similar process to be followed for the
regular review of the State Planning Provisions.
Translation of Interim Planning Schemes
5.21. In relation to the translation of the interim planning schemes into the Local
Provisions Schedules the Position Paper states as follows:
The only changes to the local provisions in the existing schemes that will be
provided in the new Local Provisions Schedules are those changes that are
required to effectively implement the State Planning Provisions.
This will largely be a translation exercise, with the new State Planning
Provision standards largely applying to the current zone maps without
requiring any redrawing of the existing zone boundaries.
Any strategic rezoning that may be required for other purposes, for example as
a result of issues arising through or not addressed as part of the interim scheme
process, can occur as part of the standard amendment process under LUPAA
either prior to or after the introduction of the Local Planning Schedules.
5.22. There is no obvious provision in the Bill which would appear to prevent zone
changes when a Local Provisions Schedule is prepared and the rationale for not
allowing such changes when the Local Schedule is exhibited and subject to a
representation and hearing process is not apparent.
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 5 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
5.23. The Position Paper also suggests that if the provisions in relation to Particular
Purpose Zones and Specific Area Plans are not changed, these will not need to
be subject to the same exhibition process. Again there is no obvious provision
in the Bill which allows for only part of a Local Provisions Schedule to be
placed on exhibition.
Combined Permit and Amendment Process
5.24. In relation to the combined permit and amendment process in section 47ZK it
would be clearer to use the word 'prohibited' rather than 'not be allowed'. This
would be consistent with the wording used in section 60C(8).
Applications under previous Schemes
5.25. In relation to the transitional provisions it is suggested that an application made
under a former scheme that is subject to a further information request should
have 6 months to comply with that request or the application should lapse.
Hobart Council has over 100 applications in this category which could be
waiting to be determined under a former scheme for a long period of time. This
should also apply to any permit application where a further information request
has been made.
S58 Permits
5.26. The reduction in the time period for determination of section 58 applications
from 28 days to 21 days will be difficult for Councils particularly when
referrals to TasWater are required. To avoid potential appeals under section 59
more applications are likely to require an extension to the statutory timeframe
placing a further administrative burden on Councils. This was proposed in the
LUPAA amendments in 2014 and not supported generally by councils, nothing
has changed which would now suggest that it is appropriate.
6.
IMPLEMENTATION
6.1.
The implementation of these proposals is a matter for the State Government in

delivering formal legislative provisions.
7.
STRATEGIC PLANNING IMPLICATIONS
7.1.
There are no direct implications for the Councils Strategic Plan 2014-19.
8.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
8.1.
There are no financial implications directly arising from this Bill.
9.
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
9.1.
There are no risk management implications directly arising from this Bill.
10.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 6 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
10.1. There are no legal implications directly arising from this Bill.
11.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS INCLUDING CLIMATE

CHANGE AND SUSTAINABILITY
11.1. There are no environmental implications directly arising from this Bill.
12.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS
12.1. There are no social implications directly arising from this Bill.
13.
PUBLIC/CUSTOMER IMPLICATIONS
13.1. No specific implications at this stage. The public is also being invited by the
Department of Justice to have its say on the Bill.
14.
MEDIA/PUBLIC RELATIONS IMPLICATIONS
14.1. There is likely to be some public interest in Councils response to the Bill.
15.
DELEGATION
15.1. Not applicable.

16.
CONSULTATION
16.1. Consultation has taken place with the Director City Planning, Senior Legal
Officer and the Manager Development Appraisal.
17.
COMMUNICATION WITH GOVERNMENT
17.1. There has been no communication with the State Government.

18.
CONCLUSION
18.1. This report considers the exposure draft of the Land Use Planning and
Approvals Amendment (Tasmanian Planning Scheme) Bill 2015 (the Bill) and
seeks endorsement from Council of a letter to the Department of Justice in
response to an invitation to comment on the Bill.
18.2. The Bill replaces the current Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993
provisions for local planning schemes with provisions for a new Tasmanian
Planning Scheme.
18.3. The draft Bill gives effect to a proposed structure for the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme that consists of a set of statewide planning controls (State Planning
Provisions) and Local Provisions Schedules that contain the Local Planning
Provisions including the zone and overlay maps for each local area.
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 7 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
18.4. The current provisions for planning directives and planning schemes (including
interim directives and interim schemes) will be replaced with new provisions
for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
18.5. It is considered that the Bill as drafted will meet the Governments aim of
introducing a set of statewide planning controls and local provisions and
provide for their amendment into the future. The processes set up under the Bill
are similar to those provided at the moment in LUPAA for the introduction and
amendment of planning schemes.
18.6. The main issue of concern relates to how the State Planning Provisions will be
kept under regular and periodic review by the Minister. It is considered that a
timeframe and process for review should be included in the legislation in order
to provide a level of confidence that such reviews will be conducted and a
process followed that allows for consultation with the community and planning
authorities.
18.7. Planning authorities will be responsible for administration of the State Planning
Provisions and will be best placed to identify issues in their implementation. To
have a situation where there is no formal process for planning authorities to
suggest amendments to the State Planning Provisions is not in the interests of
having a planning system that is fairer, faster and simpler.
18.8. The regular and periodic review of the State Planning Provisions should provide
a process for planning authorities to suggest aspects of the Provisions that
should be reviewed.
18.9. There a number of matters of detail in relation to future implementation of the
Bill and these are discussed in section 5 of this report.
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 8 of 9
CPC Agenda
19.
20/7/2015
RECOMMENDATION
That:
19.1. The report jmc(s:\projects\legislation\lupaa amendments 2015\report for
committee july15.docx) be received and noted.
19.2. The letter to the Department of Justice in Attachment A be endorsed.
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.
(James McIlhenny)
MANAGER PLANNING POLICY AND HERITAGE
(Neil Noye )
DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING
Attachment(s)
A Letter to Department of Justice
B Position Paper Legislation for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme
C Facts sheets
Created: 25/11/2011 Updated: 13/07/2015
Page 9 of 9
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Enquiries to:
:
:
Our Ref:
James McIlhenny
62 382 891
mcilhennyj@hobartcity.com.au
S16-011-02
:JMC
(s:\projects\legislation\lupaa amendments
2015\gm to sec doj july15.docx)
9 July 2015
Mr Simon Overland
Secretary, Department of Justice
GPO Box 825
Hobart Tasmania 7001
legislation.development@justice.tas.gov.au
Dear Mr Overland
LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS AMENDMENT

(TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME) BILL 2015
I am writing to you in relation to the exposure draft of the Land Use Planning and
Approvals Amendment (Tasmanian Planning Scheme) Bill 2015 released by the
Department of Justice.
This letter is to formally advise you that our Council considered a report on the Bill at
its meeting of 27th July 2015 and endorsed the following comments:
General
It is considered that the Bill as drafted will meet the Governments aim of introducing a
set of statewide planning controls and local provisions and provide for their
amendment into the future. The processes set up under the Bill are similar to those
provided at the moment in LUPAA for the introduction and amendment of planning
schemes.
The success or otherwise of the Governments objective; to make Tasmanias
planning system fairer, faster, cheaper and simpler will largely depend upon the
State Planning Provisions themselves rather than anything contained in the draft Bill.
At this stage of the process it appears that the Bill is simply a rearrangement of the
deck chairs. The only element of the Bill that makes part of the system faster is the
proposed reduction in the timeframe for assessing permitted use and development
from 28 days to 21 days.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The impact of the Bill on good planning outcomes at the local level will also not
become obvious until the State Planning Provisions and the criteria for when Local
Provisions can be used are drafted.
Legislative drafting
When the amending Bill is 190 pages for an Act that is 145 pages and section numbers
extend to 47ZX consideration needs to be given to whether or not it would be better
to replace the Act in its entirety in the interests of both understanding the amendments
and simplification of the Act itself.
State Policies
It is noted in the Position Paper that once the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in place,
the Government will consult with local government, stakeholders and the community
on a suite of new state planning policies and that the new state planning policies will
inform a review of Tasmanias three regional land use strategies and the first review of
the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The preparation of additional state policies is supported however it is disappointing
that these policies have not been prepared in time to inform the drafting of the State
Planning Provisions. It is unfortunate that the drive for consistency has taken
precedence over policy development.
Regional Land Use Strategies
The Bill provides that the Minister may declare a regional land use strategy for each
regional area and must keep these strategies under regular and periodic review.
The continued recognition of the important role of the regional land use strategies in
guiding strategic planning and the spatial application of zones across the State in the
Bill is supported.
Both the Position Paper and the Bill are silent on how the regional land use strategies
will be kept under regular and periodic review by the Minister. It is considered that a
timeframe and process for review should be included in the legislation in order to
provide a level of confidence that such reviews will be conducted and a process
followed that allows for consultation with the community and planning authorities.
Review of State Provisions
The Bill provides that that the Minister will be required to keep the State Planning
Provisions under regular and periodic review.
Again both the Position Paper and the Bill are silent on how the State Planning
Provisions will be kept under regular and periodic review by the Minister. It is
conducted and a process followed that allows for consultation with the community and
planning authorities.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
In relation to review of the State Planning Provisions the Position Paper does state;
The statutory framework does not prevent any person from requesting that the
Minister consider developing a State Planning Provision to address a particular issue,
on an administrative basis. The Minister would then need to determine whether
preparation of such a State Planning Provision is desirable before any further work
could proceed.
Such an approach to review of the State Provisions is ad hoc and does not provide for
issues related to implementation of the State Provisions to be addressed in a consistent
and comprehensive manner.
Section 47(5) provides that a planning authority, when reporting to the Commission
following exhibition of a Local Provisions Schedule must not include a
recommendation that a State Planning provision be altered. Section 47ZB(5) provides
the same restriction in relation to amendments to a Local Provisions Schedule. Such
restrictions are considered unreasonable when deficiencies in the State Provisions are
identified through the exhibition process.
Planning authorities will be responsible for administration of the State Planning
Provisions and will be best placed to identify issues in their implementation. To have
a situation where there is no formal process for planning authorities to suggest
amendments to the State Planning Provisions is not in the interests of having a
planning system that is fairer, faster and simpler.
The regular and periodic review of the State Planning Provisions should provide a
process for planning authorities to suggest aspects of the Provisions that should be
reviewed.
Provision of Draft Local provisions
Section 41 of the Bill provides that the Minister may direct a planning authority to
provide a draft Local Provisions Schedule to the Commission within a minimum
period of 42 days. This time frame is not sufficient for the initial Local Provisions
Schedule to be drafted and then considered and endorsed by Council. A 90 day period
would be more realistic.
Review of Local Provisions Schedule
Section 47H of the Bill requires planning authorities to keep their Local Provisions
Schedules under regular review in accordance with the process set out in the draft Bill
and states the purpose of the review. Again the period of the regular review is not
specified.
The process for reviewing planning schemes will require planning authorities to seek
public comment for a minimum of 21 days and submit a report to the Commission
including the planning authoritys opinion as to whether the Schedule requires
amendment or replacement or can continue in its current form. It would be
appropriate for a similar process to be followed for the regular review of the State
Planning Provisions.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Translation of Interim Planning Schemes

In relation to the translation of the interim planning schemes into the Local Provisions
Schedules the Position Paper states as follows:
The only changes to the local provisions in the existing schemes that will be provided
in the new Local Provisions Schedules are those changes that are required to
effectively implement the State Planning Provisions.
This will largely be a translation exercise, with the new State Planning Provision
standards largely applying to the current zone maps without requiring any redrawing
of the existing zone boundaries.
Any strategic rezoning that may be required for other purposes, for example as a
result of issues arising through or not addressed as part of the interim scheme process,
can occur as part of the standard amendment process under LUPAA either prior to or
after the introduction of the Local Planning Schedules.
There is no obvious provision in the Bill which would appear to prevent zone changes
when a Local Provisions Schedule is prepared and the rationale for not allowing such
changes when the Local Schedule is exhibited and subject to a representation and
hearing process is not apparent.
The Position Paper also suggests that if the provisions in relation to Particular Purpose
Zones and Specific Area Plans are not changed, these will not need to be subject to the
same exhibition process. Again there is no obvious provision in the Bill which allows
for only part of a Local Provisions Schedule to be placed on exhibition.
Combined Permit and Amendment Process
In relation to the combined permit and amendment process in section 47ZK it would
be clearer to use the word 'prohibited' rather than 'not be allowed'. This would be
consistent with the wording used in section 60C(8).
Applications under previous Schemes
In relation to the transitional provisions it is suggested that an application made under
a former scheme that is subject to a further information request should have 6 months
to comply with that request or the application should lapse. Hobart Council has over
100 applications in this category which could be waiting to be determined under a
former scheme for a long period of time. This should also apply to any permit
application where a further information request has been made.
S58 Permits
The reduction in the time period for determination of section 58 applications from 28
days to 21 days will be difficult for Councils particularly when referrals to TasWater
are required. To avoid potential appeals under section 59 more applications are likely
to require an extension to the statutory timeframe placing a further administrative
burden on Councils. This was proposed in the LUPAA amendments in 2014 and not
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
supported generally by councils, nothing has changed which would now suggest that it
is appropriate.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Yours sincerely
(N.D.Heath)
GENERAL MANAGER
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
REFORMING TASMANIAS
PLANNING SYSTEM
Legislation for the

Tasmanian Planning
Scheme
A POSITION PAPER FOR CONSULTATION TO ACCOMPANY THE DRAFT
EXPOSURE BILL
LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS (TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME) AMENDMENT
BILL 2015
Department of Justice
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
POSITION PAPER LEGISLATION FOR A TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME
This Position Paper outlines the proposed legislative model for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The Paper has been prepared by the Government for consultation purposes with local government,
stakeholders and the Tasmanian community on the proposed model, and accompanies the draft
Exposure Land Use Planning and Approvals (Tasmanian Planning Scheme) Amendment Bill 2015.
Consultation on the draft state content of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme will be managed through
a separate process.
The draft Exposure Bill, Position Paper and Fact Sheets can be accessed on the Department of
Justices website at http://www.justice.tas.gov.au/
Submissions in relation to the draft Exposure Bill can be provided to:
legislation.development@justice.tas.gov.au; or
Office of Strategic Legislation and Policy
GPO Box 825 Hobart 7001
The closing date for submissions is 10 August 2015.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Definitions
Tasmanian Planning Scheme
A single statewide planning scheme containing all of the

State Planning Provisions and Local Planning Schedules
that apply in Tasmania
State Planning Provision
A standard provision of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme

that applies consistently across Tasmania
Local Planning Provision
A provision of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme that

applies to a particular local council area
Local Provisions Schedule
A Schedule that contains all of the Local Planning

Provisions that apply to a particular local council area
Particular Purpose Zone
A zone included in the current template for planning

schemes in Tasmania and used in current schemes that
allows local provisions to apply for a particular purpose,
where the other standard zones do not provide
appropriate controls to meet the local circumstances
Planning Directive
A planning directive made under the current Act for a

statewide planning control
Specific Area Plan
A plan that provides for local planning controls to apply

to a specific site within one or a number of zones
Acronyms
LUPAA
LPP
LPS
SPP
SPPA
TPC Act
Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

Local Planning Provision
Local Provisions Schedule
State Planning Provision
State Policies and Projects Act 1993
Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Table of contents
Executive summary
Background
Structure of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme
State Planning Provisions
Local Planning Provisions
Interim Planning Schemes
10
Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme
10
Summary of proposed changes
10
11
Preparation of draft State Planning Provisions
12
Public exhibition and assessment
14
Local Planning Provisions
14
Making and Modifying Local Provisions Schedules
14
Amending Local Provisions Schedules
16
Review of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme
16
Other matters
19
Special planning orders
19
Statutory timeframe for permitted use and development
19
Other proposed changes
20
Savings and Transitional Provisions
20
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Executive Summary
The delivery of a statewide planning scheme is a key platform of the Governments planning
reform agenda to make Tasmanias planning system fairer, faster, cheaper and simpler.
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will deliver a high level of consistency in the planning
controls that apply across the State, providing greater certainty to investors and the
community about what use and development can occur.
This Paper provides an overview of proposed changes to the Land Use Planning and Approvals
Act 1993 to accompany the draft Exposure Bill for consultation purposes. The Government
intends to introduce a final Bill to Parliament later this year to provide the framework for
introducing the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The draft Bill gives effect to a proposed structure for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme that
meets the recommendations of the Tasmanian Planning Reform Taskforce. It also introduces
a 21-day statutory timeframe for assessing permitted use and development applications when
the Scheme takes effect.
The proposed structure of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme includes:
a set of statewide planning controls (State Planning Provisions); and
Local Provisions Schedules that contain the Local Planning Provisions including the
zone and overlay maps for each local area
Under the proposed model the Government will develop the State Planning Provisions
including the template for the Local Provisions Schedules, while planning authorities will
develop the content of the Local Planning Schedules.
The State Planning Provisions and the relevant Local Provisions Schedule will together form
all of the planning controls that apply to a local area (the local application of the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme). These will be administered by local planning authorities.
The proposed processes for making and amending the State Planning Provisions build on the
processes for planning directives under the current Act with some changes including a
clearer statutory assessment process and ability for the Minister to prepare the draft
provisions, issue terms of reference for their preparation and modify the draft provisions in
response to statutory consultation.
The proposed processes for making and amending Local Planning Provisions are broadly
similar to the processes for making and amending planning schemes under the current Act.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The Taskforce has commenced initial drafting of the State Planning Provisions with assistance
from a drafting team provided by the State Government and with support from local
government through the Local Government Association of Tasmania.
Local government and stakeholders will be consulted as the draft provisions are prepared,
prior to a statutory public consultation on the draft provisions in 2016.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Background
The delivery of a statewide planning scheme is a key platform of the Governments planning
reform agenda to make Tasmanias planning system fairer, faster, cheaper and simpler.
This Position Paper provides an overview of the proposed changes to the Land Use Planning
and Approvals Act 1993 (LUPAA) to provide for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme, to accompany
the draft Exposure Bill for consultation purposes.
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will deliver a high level of consistency in the planning
controls that apply across the State, providing greater certainty to investors and the
community about what use and development can occur.
In May 2014 the Government established the Tasmanian Planning Reform Taskforce to
provide advice on the delivery of a statewide planning scheme and to undertake the
preliminary drafting of the state planning provisions.
The draft Exposure Bill gives effect to a proposed structure for the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme that is consistent with the Taskforces recommendations.
The proposed model aims to achieve a balance between consistency in the planning controls
across Tasmania and retaining the necessary flexibility to address specific local planning
matters where required.
Development of the statewide content of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is now underway.
Local government and stakeholders will be consulted as this content is developed, prior to a
statutory public consultation in 2016.
The Taskforce is leading initial drafting of the State Planning Provisions with the assistance of
a drafting team provided by the State Government and supported by local government,
including the preliminary targeted consultation.
The amendments to the LUPAA that commenced on 1 January 2015, along with changes to
administrative practice, aimed to enable all 29 interim planning schemes in Tasmania to be
finalised by the end of 2015, in preparation for the introduction of the new Tasmanian
Planning Scheme.
Consultation on those changes showed strong support from local government and the
majority of stakeholders for finalising the interim schemes quickly and focusing State and
local government resources on delivering the statewide planning scheme. The Government
intends to introduce a final Bill to Parliament later this year to provide the framework for
introducing the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Structure of the Tasmanian Planning

Scheme
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will be based on a clear set of planning controls that apply
consistently to land use and development across the State.
The proposed structure of the scheme includes:
a set of statewide planning controls (State Planning Provisions); and
Local Provisions Schedules that contain the Local Planning Provisions including the
zone and overlay maps for each local area*
Under the proposed model the Government will develop the State Planning Provisions
including the template for the Local Provisions Schedules. Figure 1 illustrates this structure.
Planning authorities will develop the Local Provisions Schedules for their local municipal
area. The Schedules will include the zoning and overlay maps that indicate which State
Planning Provisions are to apply to each local area, and any other unique local planning
controls that are approved.
The State Planning Provisions and the relevant Local Provisions Schedule will together form
all of the planning controls that apply to a local area (the local application of the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme). These will be administered by local planning authorities.
A key consideration put forward by the Taskforce was that it should be possible to clearly
identify the State Planning Provisions as a single part of the scheme that applies universally
across the state, rather than having the State and Local Planning Provisions interspersed
throughout the scheme.
* The use of the term Local Provisions Schedule provides for clear identification of the suite of Local Planning
Provisions that apply, respectively, to each local council area, and who is the planning authority in relation to
these provisions.
The use of a specific term to identify this suite for each local area will ensure, for example, each planning
authority can only initiate amendments to zoning maps and other Local Planning Provisions, and issue permits
for use and development, within their local municipal area, and that a change to a Local Planning Provision in
one local council area will not affect any Local Planning Provision in any other local council area.
It will also allow for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme to come into effect in any local council area as soon as the
Schedule for that area is completed, rather than requiring all planning authorities Schedules to be completed,
providing for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme to come into effect as soon as possible in these areas.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Another key consideration was that the initial suite of State Planning Provisions should cover
the 23 zones in Planning Directive No 1, to provide the full suite of statewide planning
controls at the same time, rather than these being introduced in a staged manner over a
number of months or years. This will provide greater certainty to landowners, developers
and the Tasmanian community sooner, rather than providing for ongoing change to the
planning controls over a longer period.
This will provide for the current 30 planning schemes in Tasmania to be replaced with a
single statewide scheme. Planning authorities will not be able to modify the content of the
State Planning Provisions of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Amendments to current planning schemes, including strategic and other rezoning proposals,
will continue to be able to be made to these schemes until the Tasmanian Planning Scheme
comes into effect in each local area. It is important that the existing schemes continue to
operate effectively until the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in place.
STATE PLANNING PROVISIONS
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will build on the current Planning Directive No 1 The format
and structure of planning schemes by providing State Planning Provisions for each of the
statewide zones and a consistent set of statewide codes.
The State Planning Provisions will include:
Purpose and Objectives

Administrative Provisions
Exemptions
General Provisions
Zones - with standard use and development provisions
Codes - with standard provisions
The State Planning Provisions will be drafted by the Government initially through the
Taskforce, and subsequently through the relevant state agency or the Tasmanian Planning
Commission. Where the Minister prepares the draft State Planning Provisions, he or she will
also have the option of establishing a non-statutory body to undertake the initial drafting or
provide advice in relation to the draft provisions. The Commission also currently has a
power to establish a Committee for this purpose under the Tasmanian Planning Commission
Act 1997.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FIGURE 1 STRUCTURE OF THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME
Purpose and objectives
Administrative Provisions
Exemptions
Part A
General Provisions
Zones
Codes
Zone and overlay maps and lists

Local area objectives
Part B Local Planning Provisions
(Local Provisions Schedules for
each council area)
Particular Purpose Zones

Specific Area pPans
Site specific qualifications*
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The drafting task will include populating the 23 statewide zones currently contained in
Planning Directive No 1 and preparing a suite of statewide codes.
The State Planning Provision for the Particular Purpose Zone will provide a template for
Local Planning Provisions where the standard suite of zones is not appropriate for a unique
land use in a particular area, and will not include any other statewide content. The content
of each Particular Purpose Zone will be prepared by the local planning authority as part of
the Local Planning Provisions.
The remaining zones will contain a purpose statement, standards for no permit required,
permitted and discretionary use and development and prescribe any prohibited use and
development within that zone, to apply consistently across the State.
The final suite of codes will be determined following a review and targeted consultation with
local government and stakeholders. The review will consider statewide codes that are in
operation or under development and the current suite of codes in interim planning schemes.
The State Planning Provisions will also contain the administrative and machinery clauses to
give effect to the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, the template for the Local Planning Provisions
and their associated Schedules, and a standard suite of exemptions for use and development
which does not require planning approval.
Some flexibility will be provided for the use of Local Planning Provisions to address local
planning issues where planning merit can be demonstrated. Criteria will apply to provide
certainty as to when Local Planning Provisions can be used.
This will maintain the integrity of the State Planning Provisions while ensuring the planning
controls are not too rigid to address local needs. The Commission will play an important
role as gatekeeper in assessing the first Local Provisions Schedules and any proposed
amendments to these over time, to ensure a balance is maintained between statewide
consistency and the need to address specific local planning matters.
The State Planning Provisions will be subject to a rigorous consultation process. Targeted
consultation will occur during the Taskforces initial drafting in 2015, followed by statutory
public consultation and assessment which is expected to commence in early 2016.
Once the Minister is satisfied that the State Planning Provisions are in a final form, they will
be formally made by Gazette notice.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
LOCAL PLANNING PROVISIONS

Once the State Planning Provisions have been made, the Minister will direct each planning
authority to prepare a Local Provisions Schedule in accordance with the template provided
as part of the State Planning Provisions.
The Local Provisions Schedules will contain all of the Local Planning Provisions that apply to
a particular local council area.
The Local Provisions Schedules will include Local Planning Provisions for:
Zone and overlay maps and lists

Local area objectives
Particular Purpose Zones
Specific Area Plans
Site specific qualifications*
*In addition to the current mechanisms for Particular Purpose Zones (PPZ) and Specific
Area Plans (SAP) that will be retained, there may be a need for additional local planning
controls to apply to specific sites in a limited number of circumstances.
The Minister will be able to direct planning authorities to review their current zoning and
overlay maps and other local provisions to consider if any changes are required to support
the introduction of the State Planning Provisions.
The only changes to the local provisions in the existing schemes that will be provided in the
new Local Provisions Schedules are those changes that are required to effectively implement
the State Planning Provisions.
This will largely be a translation exercise, with the new State Planning Provision standards
largely applying to the current zone maps without requiring any redrawing of the existing
zone boundaries.
Any strategic rezoning that may be required for other purposes, for example as a result of
issues arising through or not addressed as part of the interim scheme process, can occur as
part of the standard amendment process under LUPAA either prior to or after the
introduction of the Local Planning Schedules.
The changes to the amendment process that were introduced as part of the 2014
Amendment Bill provide a more streamlined process for strategic amendments to occur to
the current planning schemes. This more streamlined amendment processes are retained for
the Tasmanian Planning Scheme in the draft Bill.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
In most cases it is anticipated that any Particular Purpose Zones or Specific Area Plans that
exist under the current planning schemes that address more complex planning requirements
that apply to a specific site such as a major hospital or university complex would be retained
as Local Planning Provisions in the new Schedules.
The draft Local Provisions Schedules including the zone and overlay maps would then be
released for public exhibition and assessment prior to being finalised.
The draft Schedules will be subject to statutory consultation even if the local provisions,
including the zone map boundaries have not changed during the translation. This is an
important step to provide for natural justice as the detailed planning controls that apply to
individual properties in each local area will undergo some changes to achieve the consistent
statewide standards in the new State Planning Provisions.
If the provisions in relation to Particular Purpose Zones and Specific Area Plans are not
changed, these will not need to be subject to the same process.
Any person will be able to make a representation in relation to the local content of the
Schedule, but not in relation to the content of the State Planning Provisions, which will have
already been consulted on and made through a separate statutory process.
For example, a representation could be made that a different State Planning Provision should
apply to a particular piece of land, or that a Local Planning Provision should apply to that
land, to address a specific local planning issue.
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will come into effect in each local area when the Local
Provisions Schedules which contain the zoning and overlay maps to operationalise the State
Planning Provisions have been approved.
Once the Scheme is in force, it may not always be necessary for all Local Provisions
Schedules to be reviewed before a new State Planning Provision comes into effect.
For example, if a new zone was introduced as a State Planning Provision in future that only
applied to certain municipal areas, such as a new CBD zone for major centres, the Minister
would only direct those planning authorities that might be affected to review their Local
Provisions Schedules.
In these cases planning authorities would only be required to exhibit any modifications to
their Local Provisions Schedules as a result of the new State Planning Provisions (for
example, the zones where the new standards apply), rather than exhibiting the entire
Schedule and representations would be limited to these matters.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
INTERIM PLANNING SCHEMES

The current Act provides for interim planning schemes to come into force prior to statutory
consultation, with public exhibition, assessment and any resulting modifications or
amendments to the scheme occurring afterwards.
Experience with the interim planning schemes has been that these can remain in place for a
number of years prior to the public consultation and assessment process being finalised.
Interim planning schemes were introduced for the purpose of providing regional consistency
across individual planning schemes in Tasmania in a single process, and were largely intended
to consist of a translation exercise from the previous inconsistent number of zones and
codes and their content, to a new, regionally consistent model.
With the move to a statewide scheme with one set of State Planning Provisions, which will
be based on the same range of zones in these interim planning schemes, this mechanism is
not considered to be necessary to support introduction of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The current Act also includes a power for the Minister to make interim planning directives
having immediate effect for up to 12 months with the normal consultation process occurring
after the interim directive has come into force. Interim planning directives may be used
where an urgent change is required to planning schemes. This power is also in place for
State Policies under the State Policies and Projects Act 1993 (SPPA).
It is not proposed to include a power in the amended Act for either interim State Planning
Provisions or interim Local Provisions Schedules to be made. Statutory timeframes will be in
place for introducing the final provisions and natural justice will be provided with
consultation occurring prior to their introduction.
Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning

Scheme
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES
Key proposed changes to the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 include to:
Introduce definitions for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, State Planning Provisions,
Local Planning Provisions and Local Provisions Schedules
10
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Replace the current provisions for planning schemes and planning directives with a
new framework for making and amending the Tasmanian Planning Scheme including
separate processes for State and Local Planning Provisions
Provide a power for the Minister to direct planning authorities to prepare, or amend
their Local Provisions Schedules, to implement the State Planning Provisions
Provide that the Tasmanian Planning Scheme will only come into effect in each local
area once the relevant Local Provisions Schedule is in place
Introduce a statutory public consultation process and statutory timeframes for State
Planning Provisions and the ability for the Minister to modify the draft State Planning
Provisions following consultation and assessment
Remove the provisions for interim planning schemes and interim planning directives
Provide transitional arrangements for planning schemes and other relevant matters,
including any permits being dealt with under the current planning schemes
Ensure the recently proclaimed amendments passed by Parliament in 2013 and the
Act as a whole consistently reflect the new structure for the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme
It is anticipated that consequential amendments may be required to some other legislation to
ensure the references to LUPAA remain valid.
It is also anticipated that changes may be required to the Land Use Planning and Approvals
Regulations 2014 to support the above amendments to the Act.
STATE PLANNING PROVISIONS
The proposed processes for making and amending State Planning Provisions build on the
processes for planning directives under the current Act.
Key differences include that a clear statutory process will be introduced for public exhibition
and assessment of representations by the Commission, with statutory timeframes and the
Minister will either prepare the draft State Planning Provisions or issue a terms of reference
and direct the Commission to prepare the draft provisions.
The Minister will also be able to make modifications to the draft State Planning Provisions
after considering the Commissions report and any other relevant matters.
Key proposed elements for the State Planning Provisions include:
The Minister may prepare, or direct the Commission to prepare in accordance with a
terms of reference, draft State Planning Provisions (SPP)
11
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The Minister may approve the draft SPP for consultation

The Commission is to notify relevant parties and publicly exhibit the draft SPP and
invite representations for 42 days
The Commission is to consider the representations and report to the Minister on its
findings and recommendations including any proposed modifications and whether any
specific part of the draft SPP should be re-done, within 90 days or such longer period
as the Minister allows
The Minister having considered the report may make, with or without any
modifications proposed by the Commission or modifications of the Ministers own
motion, the final SPP, or refuse to make the SPP
The existing power for the Minister to make minor modifications to planning
directives without statutory consultation will be retained for the SPP
The Minister may direct planning authorities to review their Local Planning Provisions
or to make a Local Provisions Schedule to support the introduction of the SPP.
Figure 2 illustrates the process for making the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Figure 3 illustrates the process for amending the State Planning Provisions and bringing them
into effect in Local Provisions Schedules, once the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in force.
Further detail is provided below on the process for making the Local Provisions Schedules
and modifying these in future where new or modified State Planning Provisions are made.
Preparation of the draft State Planning Provisions
Under the current Act, the Commission, a planning authority, a State Service Agency or any
other person can prepare a draft planning directive and lodge it with the Commission.
Planning directives can be used for a range of purposes, and are not specifically restricted in
the current Act to making statewide planning provisions.
As the State Planning Provisions will reflect the Governments planning controls the current
arrangement where any person can prepare a draft planning directive is not considered to
be appropriate. The draft Exposure Bill provides flexibility for the Minister to either prepare
the draft provisions, or to direct the Commission to prepare these.
The Commission would be able, through its existing powers of delegation under the
Tasmanian Planning Commission Act 1997 (TPC Act), to establish a Committee to prepare the
draft State Planning Provisions on its behalf. The Commission has used this power, for
example, in the preparation of Planning Directive No 4.1 Standards for Residential Development
in the General Residential Zone.
12
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FIGURE 2 MAKING THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME
Draft State Planning Provisions prepared
Public exhibition of SPP

42 days
Commission assessment/report to Minister
90 days or such longer period as allowed by
the Minister
Minister makes final State Planning

Provisions with any modifications
Minister directs planning

authorities to develop Local
Provisions Schedules
Public exhibition of LPS by planning authority

42 days
This process will occur

separately for each
local area
Planning authority report to Commission

42 days
Commission assessment/ hearings/ modifications

90 days or such longer period as allowed by the
Minister
Commission makes final LPS with

approval of Minister
TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME
takes effect in the local area
13
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The statutory framework does not prevent any person from requesting that the Minister
consider developing a State Planning Provision to address a particular issue, on an
administrative basis. The Minister would then need to determine whether preparation of
such a State Planning Provision is desirable before any further work could proceed.
Public exhibition and assessment
The current provisions for planning directives do not require a statutory public exhibition
process that allows any person to make a statutory representation to the Commission and
there is no explicit requirement in the Act itself for any submissions that may be received to
be considered. There is also no statutory timeframe for the Commissions assessment and
report to the Minister.
The discretionary power for the Commission to conduct a hearing on planning directives
will be retained for the State Planning Provisions.
The draft Exposure Bill provides that the Commission must invite and consider
representations, and may conduct a hearing. This will allow it to deal with any issues raised
on the basis of written representations where appropriate, with the option of holding a
hearing on certain matters where it considers this is necessary or appropriate.
The Minister will be able to be represented at any hearings that may occur into the State
Planning Provisions, to provide clarity regarding the content of these provisions. This is an
administrative process which has been used previously for planning directives, and does not
require a statutory power. No specific provision is included for this in the draft Bill.
The Minister will be able to modify the draft State Planning Provisions, having considered the
Commissions report and any other relevant information.
The process for State Planning Provisions differs from the requirements for Local Planning
Provisions, which determine the specific planning controls to apply to a particular piece of
land, where the Commission must hold a hearing, with some minor exceptions similar to
those applying in the current Act.
LOCAL PLANNING PROVISIONS
Making and modifying Local Provisions Schedules
The draft Exposure Bill provides a separate process for making Local Provisions Schedules
and modifying these to reflect any new State Planning Provisions that is similar to the current
processes planning authorities follow for preparing planning schemes.
14
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
As with the current Act, a separate process will be retained for amendments to the Local
Provisions Schedules that are initiated by planning authorities to address specific issues.
Key proposed elements for the Local Provisions Schedules include:
A planning authority may with the Ministers approval provide him or her with a draft
Local Provisions Schedule and the Minister may direct a planning authority to prepare
a draft or to review a part of its Schedule in relation to a State Planning Provision
The Minister may direct the Commission to prepare a draft Schedule where the
planning authority has not provided a draft within the specified period and the
Commission must consult with the planning authority in preparing the draft
The Commission must recommend to the Minister whether the draft Local
Provisions Schedule should be publicly exhibited
The Commission with the Ministers approval may direct a planning authority to
publicly exhibit or to amend a draft Schedule or amend the draft itself
The planning authority must publicly exhibit the draft Schedule, or draft modification
to the Schedule, for 42 days and the Commission must cause a copy of the draft to
be placed on public exhibition at its office for that period
The planning authority must forward a report to the Commission within 42 days of
the exhibition period ending or such longer period as the Commission allows,
including its views on the representations
The Commission must consider the draft Local Provisions Schedule, representations
and the planning authoritys report and hold a hearing, unless the person making the
representation provides in writing that they do not wish to be heard, apart from for
minor and urgent amendments
The Commission may require a planning authority to modify the draft Schedule,
modify it itself, or reject it, or direct the planning authority to re-do a specific part
Where the Commission rejects a draft Schedule or requires a specific part to be
done again the planning authority must prepare and submit it to the Commission and
that part must be re-exhibited
A planning authority may apply to withdraw a draft Local Provisions Schedule
Where the Commission is satisfied the draft Schedule is in order, it must, with the
Ministers approval, approve it within 90 days of the planning authoritys report or
such longer period as the Minister allows.
15
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Amending Local Provisions Schedules

The current provisions for amending a planning scheme including the provisions brought in
by the LUPA (Streamlining of Process) Amendment Bill 2014 will generally be retained for Local
Provisions Schedules, with any changes required to meet the new language and structure of
the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Figure 4 illustrates the process for amending Local Provisions Schedules once the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme is in force, based on the current Act provisions.
The provisions for zoning translation issues and agreed amendments that were specifically
introduced for interim planning schemes in the 2014 Amendment Bill are no longer required
and will not be retained. Transitional provisions have been included to allow these processes
to continue to operate until the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in force.
The draft Exposure Bill retains the current ability for the Commission with the Ministers
approval to make certain urgent and minor amendments that are specified in the Act, to a
Local Provisions Schedule. It also provides that a planning authority may only initiate an
amendment to its own Local Provisions Schedule, and not to other Local Provisions
Schedules that it is does not administer or to a State Planning Provision.
Planning authorities will continue to be able to initiate rezoning of areas through
amendments to the current planning schemes, prior to the Tasmanian Planning Scheme being
introduced, for example to address any strategic issues that have been identified through the
interim planning scheme process and have not yet been addressed.
REVIEW OF THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME
The draft Exposure Bill includes provisions for a statutory review of both the State Planning
Provisions and Local Provisions Schedules. The current Act includes review provisions for
individual planning schemes.
Under the proposed model the Minister will be able to either review the State Planning
Provisions on his or her own motion or direct the Commission to review these and provide
recommendations on any changes that may be required.
The Minister will also be able to direct a planning authority to review all or part of its Local
Provisions Schedule at any time.
16
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FIGURE 3 - AMENDING THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME TO

IMPLEMENT STATE PLANNING PROVISIONS
Minister makes or amends SPP
Other amendments
Urgent and minor amendments

(no public consult)
Minister directs one or more

planning authorities to develop or
Minister brings SPP into force in
review their LPS
TPS by Gazette notice
Planning authority provides

modified LPS to Commission for
Immediate effect in LPS
approval or advises no changes
Changes made
No change to
to LPS
LPS
Commission approves
for public exhibition
Draft LPS (or draft modification to LPS) publicly

exhibited with representations limited to proposed
changes to the LPS relating to the new SPP*
Normal assessment process and final

LPS made with SPP (modification to
Note: The Commission can only consider

representations to change an LPP not to
change the content of an SPP
The SPP and the final LPS would then take
effect in the municipal area as the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme
*Representations can only be in relation to the

local content of the LPS for example:
A local qualification should apply to the land
in addition to the relevant SPP
A different SPP should apply to that land
A particular purpose zone should apply
TPS in the local area)
Immediate effect in LPS
17
Appeal if council does

not initiate
Commission can direct
council to re-assess
Planning authority
does not initiate
amendment
Council can request

further information
within 28 days
18
3 months
Commission directs planning authority
Commission decision on draft amendment and
to readvertise if substantially altered
permit if s43A application
90 days or such longer period as the Minister
28 days
allows from report
14 hearing/
42 daysmodifications by
Commission assessment/
Commission or planning authority on direction
35 days
14 42 days
Planning authority report
28 days
Planning authority exhibits draft amendment/ permit
42 days
42 days
administrative amendments
Council initiates amendment

Council certifies amendment and
determines permit if s43A application
Individual requests
planning authority
to amend LPS
Commission can dispense

with public exhibition
for certain urgent and
Planning authority
initiates amendment
to LPS (own motion)
Commission may
draft and certify
amendment
Timeframe
not met
Commission with Ministers approval

directs planning authority to initiate
amendment to LPS
Local Planning Provisions (Schedules)
FIGURE 4 AMENDING THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME LOCAL PLANNING PROVISIONS

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The provisions for reviewing Local Provisions Schedules will build on the current provisions
in the Act for reviewing planning schemes and will require planning authorities to seek public
comment for a minimum of 21 days and submit a report to the Commission including the
planning authoritys opinion as to whether the Schedule requires amendment or replacement
or can continue in its current form.
The draft Exposure Bill does not include a statutory timeframe for a regular review of the
Local Provisions Schedules, as this is expected to be largely driven by any amendment of the
State Planning Provisions which will contain the majority of the content of the planning
controls, and any review of the Regional Land Use Strategies.
Planning authorities will also continue to keep their Local Planning Schedules, in particular
the zoning maps, under regular review, as part of administering the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme in their local area.
OTHER MATTERS
Special Planning Orders
The current power to make special planning orders in the Act will be retained. In the draft
Exposure Bill these are now referred to as Special Local Provisions Schedules to fit with
the structure and language of the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Special planning orders have been used in the past for situations such as where a planning
authority has not provided an underlying zoning for Commonwealth land (as the controls
wouldnt technically apply) and the land has been sold to a private owner, leaving it with no
planning controls, such as with the previous Hobart airport land.
The power to make these will continue to be required for future situations where it may be
necessary to bring in planning controls quickly where no such controls apply or where a
specific issue is identified with the Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
Statutory timeframe for permitted use and development
The Governments election commitment to reduce the timeframe for assessing applications
for permitted use or development from 42 to 21 days and the timeframe for requests for
further information from 21 days to 14 days was partially delivered through the Land Use
Planning and Approvals (Streamlining of Process) Bill 2014.
19
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Following feedback from local government in particular, that Bill introduced a 28 day
statutory timeframe for applications for permitted use or development and a 14 day
timeframe for requests for further information.
The Government introduced the 28 day timeframe as a temporary measure recognising the
transitional arrangements required as the result of the complex drafting of some interim
planning schemes and the interaction with referrals to TasWater and the Gas entity, and
with a view to reducing it to 21 days when the statewide planning scheme comes into effect.
The draft Exposure Bill introduces the 21 day timeframe, however this provision will not
commence until the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in place. This will provide planning
authorities with a period of time to address the administrative matters that may be required
to implement the 21 day assessment timeframe.
Other proposed changes
The draft Exposure Bill provides for a number of other changes to support the transition to
a Tasmanian Planning Scheme, including that:
The provisions for planning purposes notices will not be retained as the structure of
the Tasmanian Planning Scheme and the processes supporting it will no longer
require notices to allow local provisions to override statewide provisions
The power for the Minister to request or direct planning authorities to jointly
develop, or jointly report on, their draft Local Provisions Schedules will not be
retained for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme as the Act will involve a move from a
regionally based model scheme to a statewide scheme
SAVINGS AND TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
The draft Exposure Bill provides the majority of the savings and transitional provisions in a
single Schedule to the Act, for ease of reference. This will also allow for certain of these
provisions to be amended or revoked more easily in future, with minimal effect on the
overall structure and numbering of clauses in the Act.
Given the nature of the change from 30 individual planning schemes to a single Tasmanian
Planning Scheme, a broad range of savings and transitional provisions are required for
matters relating to planning schemes including permits, permit applications, applications for
amendments to a planning scheme, appeals and planning directives.
While not technically a savings and transitional matter, the Act will continue to provide
protection for existing uses by providing that nothing in a planning scheme is to be taken to
20
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
prevent the continuance of any use of land or buildings or any development that was
commenced but not completed for any purpose for which it was lawfully used or
constructed before the new Scheme comes into operation, including by virtue of requiring a
permit. This will apply to situations where no permit was required under the previous
planning scheme, as well as where a permit is in place.
The following is a summary of the matters that are addressed in the savings and transitional
provisions, and related matters:
Applications for permits and amendments to the current planning schemes will
continue to be able to be processed until such time as the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme comes into effect in each municipal area.
Planning approvals provided under permits issued prior to the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme coming into effect will continue to have legal effect once the new Scheme is
in place. This is not a transitional provision per se, but rather a standalone provision
of the current Act (current section 20) which has been retained.
Permits that have been applied for, but not decided by a planning authority prior to
the Tasmanian Planning Scheme coming into effect will continue to be processed
under the old planning scheme however an applicant will be able to withdraw their
application and reapply under the new Scheme should they wish to.
Appeals that have been lodged but not decided prior to the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme coming into effect will continue, rather than being extinguished by the
introduction of the new Scheme. This will allow for these matters to be finalised.
Appeals that are lodged after the Tasmanian Planning Scheme comes into effect on
permits that were issued prior to scheme having effect will continue, rather than
being extinguished by the introduction of the new Scheme. This will allow for these
matters to be finalised.
Applications for amendments that have not been decided prior to the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme coming into effect, including combined applications for a permit and
an amendment to a planning scheme, if still required under the new Scheme, will be
able to translate into proposed amendments under the new Scheme rather than
being extinguished.
Planning directives, including interim directives that are in place, will be extinguished
by the new Scheme. This will be managed administratively, with all current planning
directives to be assessed and incorporated into the State Planning Provisions with any
proposed modifications, where approved by the Minister.
21
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
Planning directives subject to a current process when the Tasmanian Planning Scheme
comes into effect will be extinguished by the new Scheme. There are expected to be
few, if any, directives subject to a current process and this will be managed
administratively, with any proposed planning directives that are not yet in place to be
incorporated into the State Planning Provisions, where approved by the Minister.
Planning directives, special planning orders, planning purposes notices and any other
relevant instruments under the current planning schemes that will not be retained
under the new Tasmanian Planning Scheme will be saved and subject to transitional
provisions until such time as the new Scheme is in place, in each municipal area.
22
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
PLANNING REFORMS FACT SHEET 1
OVERVIEW
The Government is undertaking a suite of
planning reforms to provide a fairer, faster,
cheaper and simpler planning system for
Tasmania.
The first reforms were delivered in 2014 with
the passage of changes to the Land Use
Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to streamline
the processes for finalising interim schemes and
amending planning schemes, and for a range of
measures to improve the planning system.
The Government intends to consult on and
introduce further legislation in 2015 for a
statewide planning scheme (the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme).
This is a significant reform to deliver a high level
of consistency in the planning controls across the
State, providing greater certainty to investors
and the community.
The Planning Reform Taskforce established in
2014 is providing advice to Government on the
planning reforms, particularly on the delivery of
a statewide planning scheme.
The Taskforce is undertaking initial drafting of
the statewide content of the scheme.
State planning policies will be prepared and
consulted on, after the implementation of the
Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The Government also intends to introduce

further legislation to deliver on its remaining
reforms for major projects including in-principle
approval, Ministerial call in powers and changes
relating to third party appeals.
2014 Reforms
The Land Use Planning and Approvals
(Streamlining of Process) Bill 2014 made a
range of changes to the principal Act to
assist in finalising the interim scheme process
to support the introduction of a statewide
planning scheme.
A streamlined process for amending planning
schemes was also introduced to replace the
previous dispensation process and provide
new and shorter statutory timeframes.
A shorter timeframe of 28 rather than 42
days was introduced for permitted use and
development approvals. The timeframe for
additional information requests to applicants
was also reduced to 14 days.
The Government intends to further reduce
the timeframe for assessing permitted use
and development to 21 days once the
Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in place.
Other changes included allowing planning
authorities to extend permits by another
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
OVERVIEW
2 years, allowing interim planning directives

to replace existing directives, and clearer
provisions for where minor amendments to
permits can occur.
Changes were also made to the Local
Government (Building and Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act 1993 to allow planning
schemes to regulate subdivision as either a
permitted or discretionary development.

The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will deliver
a high level of consistency in the planning
controls across the State, and provide the
necessary flexibility to address local issues.
amendments necessary to implement the

new statewide provisions.
Strategic zoning changes can either be
achieved
through
the
streamlined
amendment process prior or subsequent to
the commencement of the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme.
Planning authorities will continue to apply
and administer all of the planning controls
that apply to their local area.
A single set of procedures and documents
will also be developed for all applications and
permits to support the new Scheme.
State Planning Policies
The Taskforce, reporting to the Minister for

Planning and Local Government, is
undertaking initial drafting of the statewide
content of the Scheme in consultation with
local government and stakeholders.
Once the Tasmanian Planning Scheme is in

place, the Government will consult with
local government, stakeholders and the
community on a suite of new state planning
policies.
The Government will consult publicly on a

draft Exposure Bill that implements the
Taskforces proposed model for delivering a
statewide planning scheme.
The new state planning policies will inform a

review of Tasmanias three regional land use
strategies and the first review of the
The draft Bill will provide for statutory

public consultation and assessment of
representations by the Tasmanian Planning
Commission before the Minister makes the
final statewide content of the Scheme.
The Government intends to commence

consultation on the state planning policies in
the second half of 2016.
Local planning authorities will then each

develop any local content for their area and
apply the statewide content spatially,
through zone and overlay maps.
It is anticipated these new policies will cover

a range of matters to support the planning
system, include principles to support
economic development and the future needs
of the community.
This mapping will be a translation from the

current interim planning schemes, with any
Fact Sheets Available
1. Overview, 2. The Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 3. Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 4. FAQ
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
OVERVIEW
An Interdepartmental Committee has been

established, reporting to the Minister for
Planning and Local Government, to oversee
the development of the new state planning
policies.
Regional land use strategies

The Government recognises the important
role of regional strategies in guiding strategic
planning and the spatial application of zones
across the State.
Under the Act, the Minister may declare a
Regional Land Use Strategy for each regional
area and must keep these strategies under
regular and periodic review.
These strategies are considered when a local
planning authority decides whether to
initiate an amendment to local provisions,
such as the zoning applying to that land.
place the Government will consider whether
any changes may be required to the regional
strategic planning framework to support the
implementation of the Scheme and the new
state planning policies.
As noted above, the new state planning
policies, once finalised, will guide a review of
the three Regional Land Use Strategies, in
turn providing rationale for further strategic
rezoning.

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Draft Exposure Land Use Planning and Approvals (Tasmanian Planning Scheme)
Amendment Bill 2015
THE TASMANIAN PLANNING SCHEME

The introduction of a statewide planning scheme
is a key part of Governments reforms for a fairer,
faster, cheaper and simpler planning system.
The Scheme will consist of a single set of State

Planning Provisions and a Schedule of Local
Planning Provisions for each council area.
The Government intends to introduce a Bill to

Parliament in 2015 to provide for the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme, following consultation on a draft
Exposure Bill.
The State Planning Provisions will include the

use and development standards for each zone
and a suite of statewide codes.
The Tasmanian Planning Reform Taskforce,

reporting to the Minister for Planning and Local
Government, will undertake initial drafting of the
statewide content of the Scheme.
Why are the changes needed?

The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will deliver a
high level of consistency in the planning
controls across the State, providing greater
certainty to investors and the community.
The proposed model will also provide the
necessary flexibility to address specific local
planning matters where this is required.
What will change?

The Bill will replace the current provisions for
planning schemes and planning directives with
provisions for the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme.
Local Planning Provisions will include the zone

and overlay maps that apply these standards
spatially, and any approved local variations.
The Minister (through the Department or an
appointed expert panel) or the Tasmanian
Planning Commission will prepare the State
Planning Provisions while planning authorities
will prepare the Local Planning Schedules.
Local planning authorities will continue to
implement all of the planning controls that
apply in their local area.
What consultation will occur on

the Tasmanian Planning Scheme?
The Taskforce will consult broadly with local
government and stakeholders on the draft
State Planning Provisions as these are
developed.
A statutory public consultation will then occur
on the draft provisions once these are
approved by the Minister.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
DRAFT EXPOSURE LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS (TASMANIAN PLANNING

SCHEME) AMENDMENT BILL 2015
The draft provisions will be publicly

exhibited for 42 days, followed by an
assessment by the Tasmanian Planning
Commission of the representations. The
Minister will approve the final provisions.
The Local Planning Schedules will then be
developed. These will also be subject to a
statutory public exhibition and an
assessment by the Tasmanian Planning
Commission.
When will the Tasmanian

Planning Scheme come in?
The Government intends to publicly consult
on the State Planning Provisions in early
2016, with a view to finalising these in
around mid-2016.
Planning authorities will then prepare their
Local Planning Schedules based on their
existing interim schemes, with public
exhibition
and
assessment
by
the
Commission before these are finalised.
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will take
effect in each local council area when that
Local Planning Schedule is approved, allowing
for a staged introduction of the Scheme if
required.
The Local Planning Schedules are expected
to be released for exhibition in the second
half of 2016, and finalised in 2017.

1.
Overview, 2. The Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 3. Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 4. FAQ
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

Draft Exposure Land Use Planning and Approvals (Tasmanian Planning Scheme)
Amendment Bill 2015
LEGISLATION FOR A TASMANIAN

PLANNING SCHEME
The introduction of a statewide planning scheme
is a key part of Governments reforms for a fairer,
faster, cheaper and simpler planning system.
How will the Tasmanian Planning

Scheme be made?
The Government intends to introduce a Bill to

Parliament in 2015 to amend the Land Use
Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to provide for a
Tasmanian Planning Scheme, following broad
consultation on a draft Exposure Bill.
The Minister or the Tasmanian Planning

Commission at the direction of the Minister
will prepare the State Planning Provisions
while planning authorities will prepare the
Local Planning Schedules.
The draft Exposure Bill gives effect to a proposed

structure for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme that
is consistent with the recommendations of the
Planning Reform Taskforce.
The Commission will undertake the statutory

public exhibition and assessment and provide
advice to the Minister in relation to the draft
State Planning Provisions.
What is the Tasmanian Planning

Scheme?
Once the final State Planning Provisions are

made by the Minister, planning authorities will
prepare their Local Planning Schedules based
on their existing interim schemes.
The Bill will replace the current provisions for

planning schemes and planning directives with
provisions for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme.
The Scheme will consist of a single set of
Statewide Planning Provisions and a Schedule
of Local Planning Provisions for each council
area.
Local planning authorities will continue to
implement all of the planning controls that
apply in their local area.
The Local Planning Schedules will undergo

public exhibition and assessment by the
Commission including hearings.
The Tasmanian Planning Scheme will take
effect in each local council area when that
Local Planning Schedule is approved.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

What will the State Planning

Provisions include?

Scheme be amended?
The State Planning Provisions will include

the use and development standards for each
zone and a suite of statewide codes.
It is proposed that the making and amending

of State Planning Provisions will follow a
broadly similar process to the making and
amending of planning directives under the
current Act, involving public exhibition,
representations and assessment by the
Commission, with the Minister responsible
for making the final provisions.
They will also include the purpose and

objectives of the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme and administrative provisions,
including a template for the Local Planning
Schedules.
What will the Local Provisions

Schedules include?
The Local Provisions Schedules will include
the zone and overlay maps that apply the
State Planning Provision standards spatially,
and any approved local variations.
For example, an overlay for a statewide
heritage code would show the land to
which that code applies in a local area.
They will also include a local purpose and
objectives and any particular purpose zones,
specific area plans and additional local
controls that may be required.
For example, a particular purpose zone
could be used for a complex site where the
standard statewide controls do not readily
apply, such as a university or a hospital.
It is proposed the making and amending of

Local Provisions Schedules will follow a
similar process to the current processes for
planning schemes under the Act.
Planning authorities will continue to be able
to initiate amendments to their Local
Planning Provisions. It is proposed this will
follow the current amendment processes
under the Act, including the combined
permit and amendment process.
The power to make amendments to both
State and Local Planning Provisions for
urgent and minor matters will continue,
based on the current provisions.

Scheme be reviewed?
It is proposed that the Minister will be
required to keep the State Planning
Provisions under regular review and will

1. Planning Reform: an overview, 2. A Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 3. Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015

also be able to direct planning authorities to

review their Local Planning Schedules.
Planning authorities will also be required to
keep their Local Provisions Schedules under
regular review in accordance with the
process set out in the draft Bill.

1. Planning Reform: an overview, 2. A Tasmanian Planning Scheme, 3. Legislation for a Tasmanian Planning Scheme
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

What will the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme look like?
Will I be able to make

representations on the Scheme?
It is proposed that the Tasmanian Planning

Scheme will consist of two parts:
The draft Bill provides that any person can

make a representation on the draft State
a set of statewide planning controls

(State Planning Provisions); and
Local Provisions Schedules that
contain the Local Planning Provisions
for each local area
The processes for making representations

on the State and Local Planning Provisions
are similar to the processes under the
current Act for planning schemes.
Who will prepare the Tasmanian

Planning Scheme?
How will representations on the

draft Scheme be dealt with?
The Taskforce is undertaking initial drafting

of the State Planning Provisions, in
consultation with local government and
stakeholders. The Minister will approve the
final version for public exhibition.
The draft Bill will provide that the Minister

or, where directed by the Minister the
Tasmanian Planning Commission, will be able
to prepare draft State Planning Provisions,
including amendments to these.
After receiving this advice the Minister will

decide if the State Planning Provisions need
to be modified prior to their declaration.
Planning authorities will prepare the Local

Provisions Schedules, in accordance with the
templates provided as part of the State
Representations on the draft Local

Provisions Schedules will be able to be made
on the Local Planning Provisions and the
application of the State Planning Provisions
to the local area. Representations will not be
The draft Bill provides that the Commission

will undertake the statutory assessment of
representations on the draft State Planning
Provisions and report to the Minister.
Local Provisions Schedules
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
able to be made on the content of the State

Planning Provisions, which are subject to a
separate process.
How will the Scheme be

reviewed?
The draft Bill provides that the Commission

will undertake the statutory assessment of
representations on the draft Local
Provisions Schedules.
The draft Bill provides that the Minister

must keep the State Planning Provisions
under regular and periodic review.
The role of planning authorities and the

Commission in the making of Local Planning
Schedules will be similar to their roles under
the current Act for local planning schemes.
How will the Scheme be

amended?
It provides that planning authorities must

also regularly review their Local Provisions
Schedules to ensure they remain consistent
with the State Planning Provisions.
The Minister would also be able to direct
planning authorities to review their Local
Planning Schedules at any time, including in
light of any new State Planning Provisions.
The proposed process for amending State

Planning Provisions is similar to the process
for making the initial provisions.
What is happening with the

interim planning schemes?
The processes for amending Local Provisions

Schedules will be similar to the current
processes for amending planning schemes.
The changes to the Act that commenced on

1 January 2015 provide a more streamlined
process for finalising the interim planning
schemes, to allow for the Tasmanian
Planning Scheme to be introduced.
The Minister will be able to direct planning

authorities to amend their Local Provisions
Schedules for certain purposes, including to
be consistent with a State Planning Provision.
The processes for combined permit and
amendment applications and minor
amendments to permits will be retained.
The draft Bill also retains exemptions from
the requirement for public exhibition for
certain minor and administrative types of
amendments where the public interest will
not be prejudiced.
It is anticipated that all interim planning

schemes will be finalised by the end of 2015.
How will the new state planning

policies be developed?
place, the Government will develop new
state planning policies to support Tasmanias
planning system.
It is anticipated these new policies will cover
a range of matters to support economic
development, and the future needs of the
community.

CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
The Government intends to commence

consultation on the development of state
planning policies in the second half of 2016.
How will the new state planning

policies be used?
The new state planning policies will inform a
review of Tasmanias three regional land use
strategies and the first review of the
Will the current State Policies be

reviewed?
What is happening with the other

planning reforms?
The Government intends to introduce
further legislation to implement a range of
other planning-related reforms, following the
development of the Tasmanian Planning
Scheme.
This includes the Governments election
commitments relating to major projects,
ministerial call-in powers and third-party
appeals.
Once the new state planning policies have

been developed, the Government will
consider whether any review of the current
State Policies under the State Policies and
Projects Act 1993 may be required.
What will happen to the Regional

Land Use Strategies?
The Government recognises the important
role of regional strategies in guiding strategic
planning and the spatial application of zones
across the State.
place the Government will consider whether
any changes may be required to the regional
strategic planning framework to support the
implementation of the Scheme and the new
state planning policies.
As noted above, the new state planning
policies, once finalised, will guide a review of
the three Regional Land Use Strategies.


20/7/2015
8.
SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS PROGRAM UPDATE FILE REF: 33-20-1

7xs
Report of the Director City Planning and the Environment and Climate Change Officer
of 7 July 2015.
DELEGATION:
Committee
CPC Agenda
TO
General Manager
FROM
Director City Planning
DATE
7 July 2015
SUBJECT
SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS PROGRAM - UPDATE
FILE
S33-020-01/03
20/7/2015
KG:KG (s:\projects\sustainable buildings program\report\report june 2015\report sbp update june 2015
(6).docx)
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1.
2.
The purpose of this report is to update the Council on the progression of

the Sustainable Building Program (the Program). The Program was the
subject of a report dated 28 November 2014 that included a
recommendation that a further report on the initiative be provided by
June 2015.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2.1.
The City of Hobart is investigating, following a notice of motion, the

development of a Sustainable Building Program with the Tasmanian
Government. This was the subject of a report to the City Planning
Committee and the Council in November 2014.
2.2.
The Programs emphasis is on the commercial building sector and

facilitating the retrofitting of and improvements in buildings energy,
water and carbon performance.
2.3.
A key aspect of the program is Environmental Upgrade Agreements that

act as enablers for building upgrades by the commercial sector. These
are voluntary agreements between a building owner, a finance provider
and a council where upgrade works by a building owner are financed by
a provider and repaid through local government rates.
2.4.
A key part of the investigations is the initial research necessary to

develop a program suitable for the Tasmanian context. The City has
committed $10,000, as part of the 2014/15 budget, for a study contingent
on the Tasmanian Governments equivalent contribution, which in turn
was predicated on the release of the Tasmanian Energy Strategy that
includes an action on facilitating investment in building energy
efficiency and Environmental Upgrade Agreements.
CPC Agenda
20/7/2015
2.5.
The Tasmanian Energy Strategy was released in early May 2015 and the
Tasmanian Government is finalising a Memorandum of Understanding
(MoU) with the City that includes a Tasmanian Government contribution
of $50,000 to the project.
2.6.
A Steering Committee for the project has been established and is

comprised of:
2.6.1. Louise Wilson, Assistant Director, Department of Premier
and Cabinet (Chair);
2.6.2. Brian Wightman, Executive Director, Property Council;
2.6.3. Erin Buttermore, Senior Policy Analyst, Department Premier
and Cabinet; and
2.6.4. Katrina Graham, Planning Policy and Heritage, City of
Hobart.
2.7.
The Steering Committee will consult with the:

2.7.1. Commercial building sector key stakeholders and
representative bodies;
2.7.2. City of Hobart in the areas of: Economic Development,
Legal, Rates, Buildings and Asset Management, Marketing
and Media/Community Relations, Planning and Heritage;
2.7.3. Local Government Association of Tasmania (LGAT); and
2.7.4. Local Government Division, Department Premier and
Cabinet.
2.8.
The role of the Steering Committee includes:

2.8.1. the establishment of Terms of Reference and detailed
project scope,
2.8.2. undertaking a Request for Quotation process to identify a
suitable consultant to undertake the scoping study; and
2.8.3. the preparation of necessary reports and briefings of study
outcomes and proposed implementation pathway(s).
3.
BACKGROUND / UPDATE
Page 2 of 7
CPC Agenda
3.1.
20/7/2015
The Council is investigating the development of a Sustainable Building

Program based on a Notice of Motion dated 10 December 2013:
That a report be prepared based on the examination of the Sydney City
Councils Better Buildings Partnership and the Melbourne City
Councils 1200 Cities Program, looking at the development of a similar
initiative for Hobart City.
3.2.
Below are updates on the recommendations, endorsed by the Council,

from a report on the initiative on 28 November 2014:
3.2.1.
the City/Council consider the development of a Sustainable

Buildings Program based on Environmental Upgrade
Agreements in collaboration with the Tasmanian Government;
StatusCommenced:TheTasmanianGovernmentandtheCityof
HobarthaveagreedtocollaborateontheprogramandtheCrownis
developingaMOUtoreflectthis.
3.2.2.
subject to above, the City/Council inform:

the Tasmanian Government of its decision and establish a
technical working group comprised of Council1 and Tasmanian
Government officers;2
StatusComplete:ASteeringCommitteehasbeenestablished
comprisedofrepresentativesfromthePropertyCouncil;DPAC;and
CityofHobart
TheSteeringCommitteewillconsultwith:
Commercialbuildingsectorkeystakeholdersandrepresentative
bodies;
CityofHobartintheareasof:EconomicDevelopment,Rates,Heritage,
Legal,BuildingsandAssetManagement,Marketingand
Media/CommunityRelations;
LGAT;and
LocalGovernmentDivision,DPAC.
the CCCLM of its decision and if it progresses with a

Sustainable Building Program may consider City Switch as part
of the program;
StatusComplete
1
Coordinated by City Planning in collaboration with Economic Development, Legal Services, Commercial
Services and Rates, and Professional Services
2
With representatives invited from State growth and the Department of Premier and Cabinet, Climate Change
Office
Page 3 of 7
CPC Agenda
3.2.3.
20/7/2015
the City/Council make available $10,000, subject to the same

amount being provided by the State Government for the
development of a segmentation study3 and business case to
inform the progression of a Sustainable Building Programs
based on Environmental Upgrade Agreements;
StatusCommenced:TheCityhasprovidedits$10,000contribution
totheTasmanianGovernmentaspartofthe2015/16budget.The
CrownisfinalisingaMoUwiththeCitythatcoverstheTasmanian
Governmentcontributionof $50,000andtheCitys$10,000
contribution
3.2.4.
the Environment and Climate Change Project Officer role be

increased to 0.8 FTE, it is currently 0.6 FTE, up to June 30th
2015, to coordinate the program investigation and development;
StatusCommenced:ThisistobeextendedtoJune2016toenable
theprojectsdeliveryandisincludedin2015/16budget.
3.2.5.
a detailed report for the City/Councils consideration, including

the segmentation study and business case, be prepared on the
Sustainable Buildings Program, based on Environmental
Upgrade Agreements, by June 2015;
Statuscomplete:anupdatereporthasbeenprovidedinlieuofa
detailedreportastheprojectisnotbeenabletobesubstantively
commenced,untilthesigningoftheMoUexpectedinlateJuly2015.
4.
PROPOSAL
4.1.
5.
It is proposed that a report for the consideration of the Council be

provided by June 2016, or sooner subject to the completion of the
necessary Program background and scoping studies, and the framing of
an appropriate Tasmanian Program for consideration.
IMPLEMENTATION
5.1.
The Steering Committee is comprised of:

5.1.1.
5.2.
Louise Wilson, Department Premier and Cabinet

Brian Wightman, Property Council
Erin Buttermore, Department Premier and Cabinet
Katrina Graham, City of Hobart.
The role of the Steering Committee is to:

5.2.1.
Prepare the projects Terms of Reference;
A segmentation study is conducted to determine similarities and differences between target groups to divide
into market segments, a key consideration of the study would relate to unmet needs, barriers and opportunities
that could be addressed through the program.
Page 4 of 7
CPC Agenda
5.3.
6.
20/7/2015
5.2.2.
Prepare a detailed project scope, that includes consultation with

key property owners, and provide follow up reporting necessary
for the progression of its implementation;
5.2.3.
Conduct a Request for Quotation process to identify a suitable

consultant to undertake the scoping study; and
5.2.4.
Prepare and disseminate reports, documentation and information

relevant to the Program.
The Steering Committee will consult with:

5.3.1.
Commercial building sector key stakeholders and representative

bodies;
5.3.2.
City of Hobart in the areas of Heritage, Legal, Economic

Development, Rates, Buildings and Asset Management,
Marketing and Media/Community Relations;
5.3.3.
Local Government Association of Tasmania; and
5.3.4.
Local Government Division.
STRATEGIC PLANNING IMPLICATIONS

6.1.
The proposal furthers the following Council strategies:

6.1.1.
Strategic Plan:
2.2.3 Promote Opportunities to improve the energy efficiency
of the City
- Identify emerging initiatives for energy efficiency and potential
funding for development
- Promote energy efficiency initiatives to the community
FD 7.1 A destination of choice and a place for growth
Explore Strategies to integrate economic development whilst
maintaining and enhancing Hobarts character and values.
7.1.2 Actively promote Hobarts competitive advantage
- Implement promotional opportunities outlined in the Councils
Economic Development Strategy.
6.1.2.
Hobart Climate Change Strategies x 5:

Commercial Office Sector: 2.14 Investigate opportunities for
the Promotion of City program or similar to promote energy
efficiency through the STCA in collaboration with State
Government and peak organisations
Retail Sector: Investigate opportunities for the promotion of
GreenBiz or similar programs to improve energy efficiency .
Page 5 of 7
CPC Agenda
6.1.3.
6.2.
7.
Economic Development Strategy:

Facilitating Office Based Activity:
3.1 Understand the economic drivers for a local or regional
community
3.1.1 Collection and analysis of city data and trends.
3.3 Seek to broaden the economic base and minimise impacts
3.3.1 Facilitation of significant city developments
3.3.4 Office Strategy
3.4 Establish strategic alliances and relationships with existing or
potential businesses or markets both domestic and international
3.5 Create networks within communities to build relevance,
engagement and participation.
Additionally such a program would complement the Inner City Action

Plan in particular its emphasis for improved sustainability, comfort and
use of the City through the provision of opportunities to enhance the
commercial office sector.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
7.1.
Funding Source(s)
7.1.1.
7.2.
7.3.
None
Impact on Future Years Financial Result

7.3.1.
7.4.
The current City Plannings Planning, Policy and Heritage

budget, 2014/15 already has an allocation for the City of
Hobarts contribution of $10,000 towards the Project.
Impact on Current Year Operating Result

7.2.1.
As indicated above the 2015/16 budget includes an allocation to

increase the Environment and Climate Change Officer Role from
its current 0.6 FTE to 08 FTE.
Asset Related Implications

7.4.1.
8.
20/7/2015
Not applicable
COMMUNICATION AND MEDIA IMPLICATIONS

8.1.
In the first instance a media release relating to the project should be

prepared subject to the Councils endorsement of recommendations to
further investigate the project.
8.2.
A more detailed communication plan and strategy will be provided

following the scoping study.
Page 6 of 7
CPC Agenda
9.
CONSULTATION
9.1.
10.
20/7/2015
This report has been prepared in consultation with the following:

9.1.1.
Brian Wightman, Tasmanian Property Council
9.1.2.
Louise Wilson and Erin Buttermore, Department of Premier and

Cabinet, Climate Change Office
COMMUNICATION WITH GOVERNMENT

10.1. The Environment and Climate Change Officer has been liaising with
Erin Buttermore Department of Premier and Cabinet, Climate Change
Office on progression of the Project. The Department of Premier and
Cabinet have taken over the implementation and delivery role for the
Tasmanian Energy Strategy.
11.
RECOMMENDATION
That:
11.1. The report KG:kg (s:\projects\sustainable buildings
program\report\report june 2015\report sbp update june 2015.docx) be
received and noted.
11.2. A detailed report for the Councils consideration, including the
segmentation study and business case, be prepared on the Sustainable
Buildings Program, based on Environmental Upgrade Agreements, by
June 2016;
(Katrina Graham)
ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE OFFICER
(Neil Noye)
DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING
Page 7 of 7

20/7/2015
MOTION OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN UNDER REGULATION 16 (5)

OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (MEETING PROCEDURES) REGULATIONS
2015
9.
PROPOSED NEW HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE - FILE REF: 13-1-9

ALDERMAN REYNOLDS
That , given the introduction of the Interim

Planning Scheme, new heritage overlays and the
demise of the Battery Point Planning Scheme and
Advisory Committee, the Council:
1. supports the establishment of a Heritage
Advisory Committee to provide advice and oversee
the development of heritage guides to assist the
implementation of the Interim Planning Scheme.
2. requests that further advice be provided to
Council on a Committee Terms of Reference,
suggested membership and process for
appointment, drawing on the experience of the
other Council Heritage Advisory Committees
operating around Australia.
Rationale:
The Hobart Interim Planning Scheme sees a number of important changes in the
protection of Hobarts heritage. Of particular note is that the Battery Point Planning
Scheme and the associated Advisory Committee which have been central to heritage
protection in Battery Point no longer exist. There are also new heritage overlays and
listings which need interpretation and communication to the public.
Hobart City is the second oldest city in Australia with a large number of important
heritage properties and a lot of complex heritage information that needs to be
considered and communicated to the community. Heritage is also an essential part of
Hobarts tourism brand.
A number of City Councils around Australia have Heritage Advisory Committees to
promote community awareness of a city's heritage and advise and assist Council on
heritage management policy.
cont/

20/7/2015
Item No. 9 continued

Some of the Councils that have Heritage Advisory Committees include Penrith City
Council, Liverpool City Council, Yarra City Council, Brisbane City Council,
Shepparton City Council, Bendigo City Council and Toowoomba City Council, just to
name a few.
The nature of many of these Heritage Advisory Committees is to support the Councils
planning goals by:
providing a forum for input from the community and the professional heritage
sector on matters of heritage significance to the Local Government Area;
to support Council in the promotion of heritage matters, increasing community
awareness and understanding of heritage conservation ;
overseeing the preparation of quality heritage advice in a published form
available to the public; and
providing input to Council on heritage programming, exhibitions, education and
events;
Heritage is an essential part of Hobarts character and an important matter for many
people in the community. A Heritage Advisory Committee will assist Council to meet
its Strategic Planning goals.
The General Manager reports:

"In accordance with clause 5 of the Notices of Motions procedures, I provide the following
qualification that the substance of this Notice of Motion resides within the jurisdiction of
the Hobart City Council, as it requests the establishment of a Council advisory panel."

20/7/2015
10. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE FILE REF: 13-1-10

Pursuant to Section 29 of the Local Government (Meeting Procedures) Regulations
2015, an Alderman may ask a question without notice of the Chairman, another
Alderman or the General Manager or the General Managers representative in
accordance with the following procedures endorsed by the Council on 10 December
2012:
1. The chairman will refuse to accept a question without notice if it does not relate to
the Terms of Reference of the Council committee at which it is asked.
2.
In putting a question without notice, an Alderman must not:

(i)
offer an argument or opinion; or
(ii) draw any inferences or make any imputations except so far as may be
necessary to explain the question.
3.
The chairman must not permit any debate of a question without notice or its
answer.
4.
The chairman, Aldermen, General Manager or General Managers representative

who is asked a question without notice may decline to answer the question, if in
the opinion of the intended respondent it is considered inappropriate due to its
being unclear, insulting or improper.
5.
The chairman may require an Alderman to put a question without notice, to be

put in writing.
6.
Where a question without notice is asked at a meeting, both the question and the
response will be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.
7.
Where a response is not able to be provided at the meeting in relation to a

question without notice, the question will be taken on notice and
(i)
the minutes of the meeting at which the question is put will record the
question and the fact that it has been taken on notice.
(ii) a written response will be provided to all Aldermen, at the appropriate time.
(iii) upon the answer to the question being circulated to Aldermen, both the
Question and the Answer will be listed on the agenda for the next available
ordinary meeting of the committee at which it was asked, whereat it be
listed for noting purposes only, with no debate or further questions
permitted, as prescribed in Section 29(3) of the Local Government (Meeting
Procedures) Regulations 2015.

20/7/2015
11. CLOSED PORTION OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

The following items were discussed:
Item No. 1
Item No. 2
Item No. 3
Item No. 4
Item No. 5
Minutes of the Closed Portion of the City Planning Committee Meeting

held on Monday 6 July 2015
Consideration of Supplementary Items to the Agenda
Indications of Pecuniary and Conflicts of Interest
Responses to Questions Without Notice File Ref: 13-1-10
Questions Without Notice File Ref: 13-1-10

Open CPC Agenda

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Open CPC Agenda

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Committee Members

Ald Jeff Briscoe (Chairman)

We value people our community, our customers and colleagues.

We take pride in our work.

We look for ways to create value.

Were accessible and focused on service.

We respect diversity in people and ideas.

We recognise that everything we do shapes Hobarts future.

HOBART 2025 VISION

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

MINUTES OF THE OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY

CONSIDERATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS TO THE AGENDA

INDICATIONS OF PECUNIARY AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

TRANSFER OF AGENDA ITEMS

PLANNING AUTHORITY ITEMS CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS WITH

COMMITTEE ACTING AS PLANNING AUTHORITY

APPLICATIONS UNDER THE CITY OF HOBART PLANNING

4 GOWRIE STREET AND ADJACENT ROAD

361-365 SANDY BAY ROAD (ALSO KNOWN AS 7-9 QUORN

30 RED CHAPEL AVENUE, SANDY BAY PARTIAL

191 AND 199 NEW TOWN ROAD, NEW TOWN NEW

APPLICATIONS UNDER THE BATTERY POINT PLANNING

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

65 HAMPDEN ROAD, BATTERY POINT PARTIAL

APPLICATIONS UNDER THE SULLIVANS COVE PLANNING

63 SALAMANCA PLACE, BATTERY POINT NEW SIGN

SULLIVANS COVE VARIOUS LOCATIONS, HOBART

APPLICATIONS UNDER THE HOBART INTERIM PLANNING

109-113 LIVERPOOL STREET, HOBART PUBLIC

LOT 1, 513 SANDY BAY ROAD, SANDY BAY CHANGE OF

16 REYNOLDS COURT, DYNNYRNE CHANGE OF USE TO

LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS AMENDMENT (TASMANIAN

SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS PROGRAM UPDATE FILE REF: 33-20-1

MOTION OF WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN UNDER REGULATION 16 (5)

PROPOSED NEW HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE -FILE REF: 13-1-9

10. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE FILE REF: 13-1-10

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

BUSINESS LISTED ON THE AGENDA IS TO BE CONDUCTED IN THE ORDER

No interests have been notified, pursuant to Section 55(1) of the Local

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA (OPEN)

City Planning Committee (Open Portion of the Meeting)

CO-OPTION OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN THE

MINUTES OF THE OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

CONSIDERATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS TO THE AGENDA

INDICATIONS OF PECUNIARY AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

TRANSFER OF AGENDA ITEMS

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

PLANNING AUTHORITY ITEMS CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS WITH

CITY PLANNING COMMITTEE AGENDA

COMMITTEE ACTING AS PLANNING AUTHORITY

APPLICATIONS UNDER THE CITY OF HOBART PLANNING

4 GOWRIE STREET AND ADJACENT ROAD

Item No. 6.1.1 / Page No. 1

Density, private ope

Four (4) discretions

Seven (7)) representa

The final decision

Item No. 6.1.1 / Page No. 2

Fig.. 1. Subject site

Fig.. 2. Subject site

Fig.. 3. Subject site

Item No. 6.1.1 / Page No. 3