The draft amendment proposes to rezone 1685 Castra Road, Sprent from Agriculture to Rural and apply the priority vegetation area overlay.

The site is located at 1685 Castra Road, Sprent (folios of the Register 247683/2, 242543/1, 247683/3, 242543/2 and 247683/4) and has frontage to Castra Road.

The site is comprised of 5 titles ranging in size from 0.5ha to 4.4ha (14ha in total) and contains a dwelling and several outbuildings. Apart from an area of approximately 1.5ha of remnant vegetation, the site is generally cleared grazing land containing 2 dams.

The site is zoned Agriculture and subject to the Bushfire-Prone Areas Code and Landslip Hazard Code.

Surrounding land is zoned Agriculture to the north and Rural to the east, south and west. The site is surrounded by plantation forestry to the east, south and west.

No representations were received during the exhibition period.

The planning authority did not refer the draft amendment to TasWater under section 56S of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008.

Section 56S of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008 states:

56S. Referral to regulated entities of draft amendments to planning schemes

(1) A planning authority must [emphasis added] refer to the relevant regulated entity -

(b) a draft amendment of an LPS, administered by the planning authority, that the authority has prepared under section 38 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 as in force after the commencement of section 10 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Amendment (Tasmanian Planning Scheme) Act 2015.

There are no qualifications applied for when a planning authority may not refer the draft amendment.

The Commission referred the draft amendment to TasWater. In response, TasWater made a submission stating it had no objection to the draft amendment and that TasWater did not wish to attend any hearing.

Planning authority's response to the representations

The planning authority recommended no modifications to the draft amendment.

1. Under section 40M of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act), the Commission is required to consider the draft amendment to the Local Provisions Schedule (LPS), any representations received, statements and recommendations contained in the planning authority's section 40K report and any information obtained at a hearing.
2. No representations were received, and the Commission did not hold a hearing.
3. The Commission must also consider whether the draft amendment meets the LPS criteria as set out under section 34(2) of the Act:

(a) contains all the provisions that the SPPs specify must be contained in an LPS; and

(b) is in accordance with section 32; and

(c) furthers the objectives set out in Schedule 1; and

(d) is consistent with each State policy; and

(da) satisfies the relevant criteria in relation to the TPPs; and

(e) as far as practicable, is consistent with the regional land use strategy, if any, for the regional area in which is situated the land to which the relevant planning instrument relates; and

(f) has regard to the strategic plan, prepared under section 66 of the Local Government Act 1993, that applies in relation to the land to which the relevant planning instrument relates; and

(g) as far as practicable, is consistent with and co-ordinated with any LPSs that apply to municipal areas that are adjacent to the municipal area to which the relevant planning instrument relates; and

(h) has regard to the safety requirements set out in the standards prescribed under the Gas Safety Act 2019.

1. The relevant regional land use strategy is the Cradle Coast Regional Land Use Strategy 2010-2030 (regional strategy).
2. Veris (planning consultancy) submitted a supporting planning report, dated June 2024 (planning report) for the applicant. The planning report provided an assessment against the relevant regional policy statements within the regional strategy and submitted that the draft amendment meets the policies for the following reasons:
   • Rezoning the site to the Rural Zone would allow the Natural Assets Code of the State Planning Provisions (SPPs) to apply to development assessments. This is consistent with regional policy BNV 1, which focuses on managing and maintaining the regions biodiversity and ecosystems.
   • The site is not viable for commercial agricultural use. Therefore, rezoning the site from the Agriculture Zone to the Rural Zone to allow application of the priority vegetation area overlay is warranted.
   • The site contains threatened fauna habitat and a vegetation community of local importance.
3. Regional policy BNV 1 and 2 of the regional strategy states:

BNV 1 Maintain and manage the region's biodiversity and ecosystems and their resilience to the impacts of climate change. > > BNV 2 Protect threatened native vegetation communities, threatened flora and fauna species, significant habitat for threatened fauna species, and other native vegetation identified as being of local importance and places important for building resilience and adaptation to climate change of these.

4. A Natural Values Assessment dated November 2023, prepared by Natural State, was submitted in support of the draft amendment.
5. The natural values assessment identified that three native vegetation communities were observed on the property:
   • ASF - Freshwater aquatic sedgeland and rushland
   • NAD - Acacia dealbata forest
   • WOB - Eucalyptus obliqua wet forest with broadleaf shrubs
6. The natural values assessment also identified one threatened native vegetation community listed under the Tasmanian Nature Conservation Act 2002 (NC Act) was observed on the property:
   • Community #39 WETLANDS. ASF - Freshwater aquatic sedgeland and rushland
7. The natural values assessment also identified one threatened flora species listed as rare under the Tasmanian Threatened Species Protection Act 1995 (TSP Act) was observed onsite growing in a dam during the survey:
   • Vallisneria australis - River Ribbons
8. The natural values assessment concluded that:

Suitable hunting, foraging & nesting habitat exists for a number of threatened fauna species which are likely to utilise the waterway, native forest and the surrounding natural areas. Whilst no nests, burrows or tree hollows potentially used by threatened fauna were located on the property during the site survey, this does not mean that they are not present. > > The waterway supports at least two separate patches of the threatened aquatic plant species Vallisneria australis - River Ribbons. The dam area is classified as a threatened native vegetation community 'ASF - Freshwater aquatic sedgeland and rushland'.

9. An Agricultural Assessment Report (agricultural report) dated July 2024, prepared by Lisa Abblitt, noted that the site has been included in the Land Potentially Suitable for Agriculture Zone map through the Agricultural Land Mapping Project, which has been used as a guide for the spatial application of the Agriculture Zone through the Local Provisions Schedules.
10. The agricultural report relied on a range of data sets and information sources to establish property characteristics including soils, climate, and infrastructure.
11. The agricultural report identified that the site is constrained for agricultural use due to its natural values, soil classification, the property size and the inability to adjoin other agricultural land.
12. The agricultural report concluded that:

Whilst it is agreed that the protection of Agricultural land is of vital importance, the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates that this property has little value for agricultural use and is highly compatible with the Rural Zone purpose. The subject property lacks the physical attributes required for agricultural development, and an investment in irrigation infrastructure to improve a property of this size will likely never be repaid. This property also lacks scale, and it needs to be recognised that this report focusses on the combined 14ha property. However, the property contains five titles for which there is a future possibility of multiple ownership which results in smaller individual property sizes. In this event the constraints will be substantially magnified. But although small property size can be a constraint to agricultural enterprises, this is not the case for all rural developments. > > The Rural Zone purpose is to provide for 'a range of use or development' in rural locations. There are many opportunities for this property under rural zoning both as a whole or in smaller lots. Some suggestions include rural support infrastructure such as farm worker accommodation, packing sheds or processing facilities. This property has a value for development under rural zoning, which far outweighs its value under agricultural zoning. Importantly a change to rural zoning will not reduce the agricultural ability of this property as the use remains compatible with the zoning.

13. The planning report considered that regional policies C.2 Wise Use of Resources - Respect for What is Values, C.3 Support for Economic Activity - A Diverse and Robust Economy and C.4 Places for People - Liveable and Sustainable Communities were relevant to the draft amendment.
14. The planning report submitted that the rezone will allow for a greater variety of development opportunities on the land, providing increased control of land clearance under the Natural Assets Code, and will provide for compatible additional development opportunities while protecting the waterway through applicable land use controls resulting in a more effective utilisation of the land.
15. The planning authority supported the applicant's assessment and submitted that:

The Strategy identifies that "land is to be used in the manner best matched to its highest capability to support social, cultural and economic endeavour while always protecting the health of the environment". The submissions made with the application include the statements that "rezoning will allow additional uses compatible with agriculture while also allowing agricultural operations in various forms. The proposal will allow a better utilisation of the land for uses compatible with the surrounding area" (p.24, Veris report).

1. The Commission notes the proposal represents an extension of the existing Rural Zone and agrees with the justification from the applicant that the draft amendment would further the regional strategy. The Commission is persuaded that the proposal is consistent with BNV 1 of the regional strategy as it will allow future development assessments to recognise and consider the significance of the priority vegetation at the site under the Natural Assets Code.
2. The Commission finds that the draft amendment is, as far as practicable, consistent with the regional strategy.

1. The planning authority submitted that the draft amendment supported theme 3 and 5 of the Central Coast Council's Strategic Plan 2024 -2034.

Theme 3 - Environmental Focus > > 3.3 Households, businesses, and new developments are encouraged and supported to minimise their impact on environment. > > Theme 5 - Growing Sustainably > > 5.1 The decisions we make about where people can live, work and play, what those spaces look like and how they function will be informed by community engagement, empirical data and long-term thinking.

1. The Commission considers that the draft amendment has had regard to a strategic plan prepared under section 66 of the Local Government Act 1993.

1. The planning report submitted that the subject land adjoins mostly Rural zoned land comprising forestry operations and is part of an agricultural cluster of smaller lot sizes.
2. The planning report provided an assessment on whether the zone is appropriate for the site against Section 8A Guideline No. 1 - Local Provisions Schedule (LPS): zone and code application (the guidelines).
3. The planning report considered that the site is inappropriate for the Agriculture Zone as the physical attributes and property sizes do not warrant the application of the Agricultural Zone.
4. The agricultural report included a detailed assessment of AZ 6 of the guidelines and submitted that the site is inappropriate for the application of the Agriculture Zone due to the limited potential for agricultural use, lack of irrigation capability, soil type and is supported by the land capability assessment which shows that the land is class 5 and 6 with low potential for agricultural use.
5. The agricultural report also submitted that the enterprise suitability mapping shows that cropping on the site is high risk and the property is only suitable for pasture.
6. The agricultural report considered that:

Through a combination of Land Capability, land suitability and constraints analysis it is believed that this property is not compatible with inclusion in the Agriculture Zone. Assessment against criteria for the Rural Zone follows.

7. The planning report also considered the appropriateness of applying the Rural Zone to the subject site. It considered that the Rural Zone would be more appropriate as it would provide for a wider variety of development opportunities suitable for a rural area and particularly on smaller lots constrained for agricultural operations.
8. The planning report also submitted that the Rural Zone would provide protection of the natural values at the site.
9. The planning authority's supporting report considered the changes in the allowable uses under the Agriculture and the Rural zones, submitting that:

An increased number of permitted uses [under the Rural Zone] would be provided for, albeit with qualifications in many cases. These qualifications have been designed to protect existing agricultural use of the land through minimising conversion of land as well as requiring said use to be associated with Resource Development or Resource Processing. A detailed comparison of use classes for the existing and proposed land zoning is provided in Attachments 4 & 5. > > An increased number of discretionary land uses would also be able to be considered. In these circumstances, protections remain in place for the protection of existing agricultural uses and agricultural potential in the forms of the Zone Purpose, use qualifications and Clause 20.3.1. Clause 20.4.2 provides specific protection for adjoining land within the Agriculture Zone. > > Subdivision provisions would also be eased, although the only likely interaction with the subject land is through a boundary adjustment rather than subdivision.

10. The planning authority supported the application of the Rural Zone as the site is not prime agricultural land, is not regionally or locally significant, and fits the criteria for consideration for a zone other than the Agriculture Zone. The planning authority submitted that the rezone aligns with the guidelines.

1. The Commission agrees with the justification provided from the applicant and planning authority.
2. The Commission further notes that the largest of the titles to be rezoned is 4.4ha and as the Rural Zone has a minimum area for subdivision of 40ha as an acceptable solution, any future subdivision of the site would require assessment by the planning authority under the performance criteria and is unlikely to result in any significant increase in the number of lots (if any).
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's assessment of the use classes and notes that many use classes allowable in the Rural Zone are also provided for in the Agriculture Zone with qualification, no new use classes are allowed, and any future use or development would need to be assessed against the relevant provisions of the planning scheme, including the Natural Assets Code.
4. The Commission finds that the Rural Zone is appropriate for the site.

Natural Assets Code - priority vegetation overlay

1. The natural values assessment identified that three native vegetation communities were observed on the property:
   • ASF - Freshwater aquatic sedgeland and rushland
   • NAD - Acacia dealbata forest
   • WOB - Eucalyptus obliqua wet forest with broadleaf shrubs
2. The natural values assessment also identified one threatened native vegetation community listed under the NC Act was observed on the property:
   • Community #39 WETLANDS. ASF - Freshwater aquatic sedgeland and rushland
3. The natural values assessment also identified one threatened flora species listed as rare under the TSP Act was observed onsite growing in a dam during the survey:
   • Vallisneria australis - River Ribbons
4. The applicant's planning report submitted that the priority vegetation overlay of the Natural Asset Code does not apply to the Agricultural Zone and that the natural values report has identified threatened species on the property.
5. The planning report submitted that the application of the priority vegetation overlay will ensure the adequate protection of these assets.
6. The planning report noted that as the Natural Assets Code may be applied to the Rural Zone, the rezone would ensure the application of the Code and the protection of the assets when developed in the future.
7. The planning authority's supporting report submitted that sections of the site have been identified as containing priority vegetation by independent review accompanying the application. The planning authority supported the application of the priority vegetation overlay as vegetation values on the property have been identified that would be able to be protected under the proposed zoning.
8. The planning authority advised that proposed overlay reflects TASVEG 4.0 on the LISTmap.

1. The Commission agrees with the justification provided from the applicant and planning authority.
2. The rezone of the site to the Rural Zone will allow the application of the priority vegetation area overlay, which will provide protection of the vegetation communities at the site.
3. The Commission agrees that the priority vegetation overlay should be applied to the site as proposed.

State Policies and Resource Management and Planning System Objectives

State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009

1. The applicant's planning report considered that the draft amendment is consistent with the State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 (PAL Policy) for the following reasons:
   • the agricultural report identified that the Land Potentially Suitable for Agriculture Zone layer is inaccurate, and therefore the Agriculture Zone is not appropriate for this site;
   • the site does not meet the criteria for 'prime agricultural land classification', as the soil classification is Class 5 and 6;
   • the agricultural report concludes that the property has little value for agricultural purposes and is highly compatible with the Rural Zone purpose;
   • the site lacks access to large quantities of water; and
   • the property contains five small titles, totalling 14ha, which lack scale for agricultural purposes.

1. The Commission is persuaded that the planning report and supporting reports were informed by from suitably qualified persons and demonstrate that the site is not prime agricultural land, is constrained and that the application of the Rural Zone is consistent with the PAL Policy.
2. The Commission considers that rezoning the site to the Rural Zone would not unreasonably confine or restrain agricultural use in the area, as most of the surrounding land is also in the Rural Zone.
3. The Commission finds that the draft amendment is consistent with the PAL Policy.

1. The applicant and planning authority submitted that the subject site is not within 1km of a high-water mark and therefore the State Coastal Policy 1996 is not applicable.

1. The applicant submitted that the site has no access to reticulated water, sewer and stormwater services and the provisions of the planning scheme will ensure that any existing or future use or development on the site is consistent with the State Policy of Water Quality Management 1997 (Water Quality Policy).

1. The Commission agrees with the applicant that the draft amendment is consistent with the Water Quality Policy.

Resource Management and Planning System Objectives

1. The planning report considered the draft amendment aligned with the Objectives of the Act as:
   • the Rural Zone will provide use and development opportunities for currently underutilised land;
   • application of the priority vegetation area overlay will ensure that future use and development proceeds with consideration of the existing ecological values of the site;
   • the site is not considered suitable for agricultural uses;
   • the rezoning is consistent with the purpose statement and application guidelines for the Rural Zone; and
   • the site directly adjoins existing residential use and land in the Rural Zone.

1. The Commission agrees with the justification from the applicant and finds that the draft amendment furthers the Objectives set out in Schedule 1 of the Act.

1. Under section 40M of the Act the Commission must consider whether modifications to a draft amendment of an LPS ought to be made.
2. The Commission notes that several minor editorial changes are required to the draft amendment as follows:
   • the certified draft amendment references Castra Road 'Spent' instead of 'Sprent';
   • the application of the priority vegetation overlay on the certified draft amendment is shown in red. This should be modified to reflect the requirements of Guideline No. 1 Local Provisions Schedule (LPS): zone and code application which shows the priority vegetation areas overlay as green diagonal hatching; and
   • the application of the priority vegetation overlay should be limited to the site and not extend to the surrounding land as shown on the certified draft amendment.

1. Subject to the modifications described above, the Commission is satisfied that the draft amendment meets the LPS criteria and gives its approval.

1. Rezone 1685 Castra Road, Sprent (folios of the Register 247683/2, 242543/1, 247683/3, 242543/2 and 247683/4) from Agriculture to Rural as shown below.

1. Apply the priority vegetation area overlay of the Natural Assets Code to 1685 Castra Road, Sprent (folios of the Register 247683/2, 242543/1, 247683/3, 242543/2 and 247683/4) as shown below.