{"id":"BILL-TAS-land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026-22-of-2026","name":"Land Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026","slug":"land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026","collection":"bill","jurisdiction":"tas","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":"2026-01-01","administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":462155,"registerId":"BILL-TAS-land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026-22-of-2026:current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-01-01","status":"in_force","reasons":null,"registeredAt":"2026-05-27T08:48:41.581Z"},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"retrieval-0001","sectionType":"document_chunk","heading":"Document excerpt 1","content":"# Land Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026\n\n[Bill 22]-VII\nTASMANIA\n__________\nLAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS\n(MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 2026\n__________\nCONTENTS\nPART 1 – PRELIMINARY\n1. Short title\n2. Commencement\nPART 2 – LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS ACT 1993\nAMENDED\n3. Principal Act\n4. Section 14 amended (Contents of State Planning Provisions)\n5. Section 30NB amended (Interim SPPs amendments)\n6. Section 34 amended (LPS criteria)\n7. Section 54 amended (Additional information)\n8. Section 57 amended (Applications for discretionary permits)\nPART 3 – LOCAL GOVERNMENT (BUILDING AND\nMISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1993 AMENDED\n9. Principal Act\n10. Section 80 amended (Interpretation of Part 3)\nPART 4 – REPEAL OF ACT\n11. Repeal of Act\n\n2\n\n[Bill 22] 3\nLAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS\n(MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 2026\n(Brought in by the Minister for Business, Industry and\nResources, the Honourable Felix Ashton Ellis)\nA BILL FOR\nAn Act to amend the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act\n1993 and the Local Government (Building and\nMiscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993\nBe it enacted by Her Excellency the Governor of Tasmania, by\nand with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and\nHouse of Assembly, in Parliament assembled, as follows:\nPART 1 – PRELIMINARY\n1. Short title\nThis Act may be cited as the Land Use Planning\nand Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act\n2026.\n2. Commencement\nThis Act commences on the day on which this\nAct receives the Royal Assent.\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\ns. 3 Part 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended\n4\nPART 2 – LAND USE PLANNING AND APPROVALS\nACT 1993 AMENDED\n3. Principal Act\nIn this Part, the Land Use Planning and\nApprovals Act 1993* is referred to as the\nPrincipal Act.\n4. Section 14 amended (Contents of State Planning\nProvisions)\nSection 14(1) of the Principal Act is amended by\ninserting after paragraph (g) the following\nparagraph:\n(ga) may contain a map, overlay, list or other\nprovision that provides for the spatial\napplication of the SPPs to land; and\n5. Section 30NB amended (Interim SPPs amendments)\nSection 30NB(4)(a) of the Principal Act is\namended by omitting “safety or a prescribed\ncircumstance or matter” and substituting “safety,\na prescribed circumstance or matter or any other\nmatter recommended by the Commission”.\n_______________________________________________________________\n*No. 70 of 1993\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\nPart 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended s. 6\n5\n6. Section 34 amended (LPS criteria)\nSection 34 of the Principal Act is amended as\nfollows:\n(a) by omitting paragraph (da) from\nsubsection (2) and substituting the\nfollowing paragraph:\n(da) is consistent with the TPPs; and\n(b) by omitting from subsection (2)(e) “is\nsituated”;\n(c) by inserting in subsection (2)(e) “is\nsituated, being the regional land use\nstrategy in force at the relevant time”\nafter “relates”;\n(d) by omitting subsection (2A) and\nsubstituting the following subsection:\n(2A) For the purposes of subsection\n(2)(e), the relevant time is –\n(a) in the case of a draft LPS\nor an LPS, the time at\nwhich the relevant\nplanning authority\nprovides the Commission\nwith a report under\nsection 35F(1); or\n(b) in the case of a draft\namendment of an LPS or\nan amendment of an LPS\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\ns. 6 Part 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended\n6\nprepared pursuant to a\ndirection under section\n35KB(1), the time at\nwhich the planning\nauthority provides the\nCommission with a report\nunder section 35F(1); or\n(c) in the case of a draft\namendment of an LPS or\nan amendment of an LPS\nthat is not prepared\npursuant to a direction\nunder section 35KB(1),\nthe time at which the draft\nof the amendment is\ncertified under section\n40F.\n(e) by inserting the following subsections\nafter subsection (3):\n(4) Subsection (2)(da) does not apply\nto an amendment of a draft LPS\nif –\n(a) on the day on which the\nplanning authority\nprovided the Commission\nwith a report under\nsection 35F(1) in respect\nof the draft LPS, the TPPs\nwere not in effect; and\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\nPart 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended s. 7\n7\n(b) the amendment of the\ndraft LPS was prepared\npursuant to a direction\nissued, under section\n35KB(1), in respect of the\ndraft LPS.\n(5) Subsection (2)(da) does not apply\nto a draft amendment of an LPS\nif –\n(a) on the day on which the\ndraft amendment was\ncertified, under section\n40F, the TPPs were not in\neffect; and\n(b) on the day on which the\nLand Use Planning and\nApprovals (Miscellaneous\nAmendments) Act 2026\ncommences, the\nCommission has not\ndetermined the\namendment in accordance\nwith section 40Q.\n7. Section 54 amended (Additional information)\nSection 54 of the Principal Act is amended as\nfollows:\n(a) by omitting subsection (2) and\nsubstituting the following subsection:\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\ns. 7 Part 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended\n8\n(2) If the planning authority serves a\nnotice under subsection (1)\nrequiring the applicant to provide\nadditional information, the\nrelevant period referred to in\nsection 57(6)(b) or 58(2) does not\nrun for the period beginning on\nthe day on which the notice under\nsubsection (1) is served on the\napplicant and ending on the day\non which the planning authority\nnotifies the applicant under\nsubsection (3)(a) that the request\nfor additional information has\nbeen answered to its satisfaction.\n(b) by omitting subsection (3) and\nsubstituting the following subsection:\n(3) The planning authority must,\nwithin 8 business days after the\nday on which it receives the\nadditional information under\nsubsection (1), notify the\napplicant in writing –\n(a) whether the request for\ninformation has been\nanswered to its\nsatisfaction; and\n(b) if it is not satisfied,\nrequire the applicant to\nprovide it with the\nadditional information\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\nPart 2 – Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 Amended s. 8\n9\nand advise the applicant\nthat the timeframes\nreferred to in section\n57(6)(b) or 58(2) have not\nrecommenced.\n8. Section 57 amended (Applications for discretionary\npermits)\nSection 57 of the Principal Act is amended by\nomitting subsection (5AA) and substituting the\nfollowing subsection:\n(5AA) If the time period specified in\nsubsection (5) includes any days on\nwhich the office of the planning authority\nis closed during normal business hours,\nthe period is extended by one additional\nday for each such day, and the time\nperiod referred to in subsection (6)(b) is\nextended by the same number of days.\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\ns. 9 Part 3 – Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act\n1993 Amended\n10\nPART 3 – LOCAL GOVERNMENT (BUILDING AND\nMISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1993\nAMENDED\n9. Principal Act\nIn this Part, the Local Government (Building and\nMiscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993* is referred\nto as the Principal Act.\n10. Section 80 amended (Interpretation of Part 3)\nThe definition of subdivide in section 80(1) of\nthe Principal Act is amended as follows:\n(a) by inserting in paragraph (e) “or” after\n“land;”;\n(b) by inserting the following paragraph after\nparagraph (e):\n(f) a lease or licence for the\ninstallation, operation or\nmaintenance of\ntelecommunications or digital\nfacilities, renewable energy\ninfrastructure or other utility\ninfrastructure that is reasonably\nnecessary for or incidental to\nthose purposes;\n_______________________________________________________________\n*No. 96 of 1993\n\nLand Use Planning and Approvals (Miscellaneous Amendments)\nAct 2026\nAct No. of 2026\nPart 4 – Repeal of Act s. 11\n11\nPART 4 – REPEAL OF ACT\n11. Repeal of Act\nThis Act is repealed on the first anniversary of\nthe day on which it commenced.\nGovernment Printer, Tasmania","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The Bill makes a set of targeted, technical and procedural amendments to existing planning and local government laws: adding spatial tools to SPPs, widening the Commission's remit for interim SPPs, clarifying timing and consistency tests for LPSs with TPPs, adjusting the handling of \"additional information\" and office-closure time extensions, and expanding the definition of \"subdivide\" to cover some infrastructure leases/licenses. These are incremental changes within the planning and approvals legislative framework rather than a significant expansion beyond the Act's original subject matter or purpose. The notable exception is the one-year repeal (sunset), which limits these changes temporarily but does not, in itself, broaden the legislative scope."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple discrete amendments across two principal Acts (Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 and Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1993)","Several cross-references to other sections and timing milestones (sections 35F, 35KB, 40F, 40Q, 57, 58)","Introduction of spatial tools (maps/overlays) which require external spatial-data maintenance and interpretation","New procedural deadlines and \"stop-the-clock\" mechanics with an 8-business-day mandatory response (tight timelines and potential disputes on satisfiability)","Expanded administrative discretion for the Commission (broad \"any other matter\" language)","Change to a defined term ('subdivide') to include leases/licenses for various infrastructures (affects multiple decision pathways)","Sunset clause (automatic repeal after one year), creating temporal complexity for implementation and review"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this Bill changes (mechanically)\n\n- Adds an explicit spatial tool to State Planning Provisions (SPPs): the SPPs may now include a map, overlay, list or other provision that shows how the SPPs apply to particular land (s. 4).\n\n- Broadens when interim changes to the SPPs can be made: the commission may recommend interim SPP amendments not only for \"safety\" or a \"prescribed circumstance\" but for \"any other matter recommended by the Commission\" (s. 5).\n\n- Adjusts Local Provision Schedule (LPS) consistency tests and timing rules with respect to Tasmanian planning policies (TPPs): the LPS must be consistent with the TPPs (replacing a prior wording), clarifies how to determine the relevant time for which regional strategies are assessed, and creates limited exceptions where the TPP-consistency requirement does not apply to certain amendments (s. 6).\n\n- Changes the rules about requests for additional information from applicants: when a planning authority asks for more information, the statutory time limits for deciding an application stop running for the period between the request and the authority notifying the applicant that the information is satisfactory; the authority must tell the applicant within 8 business days after receiving the information whether the request has been satisfied, and if not it must ask for more and say that the statutory time limits have not restarted (s. 7).\n\n- Clarifies how office closures affect time limits for discretionary permit applications: if the decision period includes days when the office is closed during normal business hours, the decision period (and a related time period) is extended by one day for each such closed day (s. 8).\n\n- Expands the definition of \"subdivide\" in the Local Government (Building and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act to include a lease or licence for installation, operation or maintenance of telecommunications/digital facilities, renewable energy infrastructure or other utility infrastructure when such a lease/license is reasonably necessary or incidental to those purposes (s. 10).\n\n- The Act contains a one-year repeal (a sunset): the Act repeals itself one year after it commences (s. 11).\n\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Planning authorities and the Tasmanian Planning Commission: gain new drafting options (maps/overlays), expanded bases for interim SPP changes, and new procedural obligations (8-business-day reply).\n- Applicants for planning permits and LPS amendments: affected by stop-the-clock rules for additional information, adjustments to decision timeframes for office closures, and the revised tests for LPS consistency with TPPs.\n- Telecommunications, digital services, renewable energy and utility providers: potentially affected because certain leases or licences for their infrastructure are treated as \"subdivision\" for local government planning purposes.\n- Local councils and local government building officials: must apply the new definition and procedural timing changes.\n\n\nWhy it matters (practical effects and mechanics)\n\n- Spatial SPPs (s. 4) let the State put regulatory detail onto maps/overlays rather than only in text. That can increase clarity about where rules apply, but it also requires maintenance of authoritative spatial data.\n\n- Giving the Commission a broader basis to recommend interim SPP amendments (s. 5) increases the Commission's administrative discretion to trigger short-term changes. That makes the interim amendment power more flexible, and potentially less predictable for landowners and developers.\n\n- The LPS/TPP timing and exception rules (s. 6) lock the consistency test to particular points in the project timetable (for example, the date a report is provided to the Commission). That reduces retrospective application of later policy changes in some cases, but creates specific cut-off points that parties must monitor.\n\n- Stop-the-clock on additional information and an 8-business-day reply requirement (s. 7) aim to make the \"additional information\" process more orderly: an authority can pause statutory decision clocks while it awaits or checks information, and must communicate promptly whether the submission is adequate. This transfers some administrative burden to planning authorities (to make the 8-business-day assessment) while giving applicants clearer signalling about whether they need to supply more material.\n\n- Extending decision timeframes for closed office days (s. 8) prevents an applicant from being disadvantaged by temporary office closures.\n\n- Treating certain infrastructure leases/licenses as \"subdivision\" (s. 10) brings telecommunications, renewable energy and similar utility arrangements within subdivision rules. That may simplify approvals when those arrangements are incidental to the infrastructure, but it also means those operators must engage with subdivision processes.\n\n- The one-year repeal (s. 11) limits these changes to a short, defined period unless further action is taken to retain them.\n\n\nPurpose-claims and testing them against costs, incentives and trade-offs\n\n- Claimed purpose (implicit in the drafting): increase clarity and procedural certainty in planning, give the Commission flexibility to act quickly on SPPs, and ensure infrastructure-related leases are captured by subdivision law. These are implemented by (respectively) allowing spatial SPP tools (s. 4), expanding grounds for interim SPP amendments (s. 5), and expanding the definition of \"subdivide\" (s. 10).\n\n- Costs and compliance burdens: adding spatial instruments requires agencies to create and maintain authoritative map/overlay data (ongoing resource cost). The 8-business-day obligation forces planning authorities to act quickly after receiving information, which could require extra staffing or faster administrative processes. Treating leases as subdivisions could impose application and compliance costs on infrastructure providers who previously operated under a different, potentially lighter regime.\n\n- Incentives and behaviour changes: broader interim amendment powers lower the barrier for the Commission to make short-term changes, which may encourage reliance on interim SPPs rather than longer-term statutory amendments; applicants may either pre-emptively provide more detailed material to avoid extra rounds, or delay lodging until policy clarity improves. Utilities and telco firms may need to budget for subdivision approvals as part of deployment costs.\n\n- Bureaucratic discretion and implementation risk: the Commission's expanded remit (s. 5) increases administrative discretion and therefore the risk of inconsistent or unpredictable use, unless accompanied by clear guidance. The stop-the-clock mechanism and the required 8-business-day reply shift discretionary judgments (is the information \"satisfactory\"?) to planning authorities, creating potential disputes about adequacy.\n\n- Effects on markets and private enterprise: treating infrastructure leases as subdivision (s. 10) reduces regulatory fragmentation (brings arrangements into a single approval pathway) but may increase the time and cost of deploying infrastructure; this has potential effects on rollout speed, competition among providers, and project viability for smaller operators.\n\n- Concentrated benefits and diffuse costs: benefits (e.g. clearer spatial application, faster interim changes) are likely concentrated among bodies that draft or rely on SPPs and among infrastructure providers; costs (administrative burden on councils, compliance costs for applicants and utilities) are more widely distributed.\n\n\nOther practical points and implementation issues\n\n- The 1-year repeal requires either legislative renewal or extension for these changes to become permanent. Without follow-up, the changes automatically expire.\n- Agencies will need to update guidance, forms and possibly IT systems to handle spatial SPPs, the 8-business-day reply rule, and the changed subdivision definition.\n- Several changes hinge on cross-referenced statutory timing points (e.g. reports under s. 35F, certifications under s. 40F). Users must track those milestones to know which rules apply (s. 6)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026","history":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026/history","analysis":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/land-use-planning-and-approvals-miscellaneous-amendments-bill-2026/documents"}}