On 11 March 2026, Douglas and Collins, on behalf of Markarna Grazing Company Pty Ltd, submitted a request to the Commission under section 40B(1) of Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act). The request relates to an application to amend the Flinders Local Provisions Schedule and seeks a review of the Flinders planning authority's (the planning authority) decision to refuse the request to amend the LPS.

The applicant's letter to the Commission, which outlined the reasons for the requested review, noted the proposed combined draft amendment and permit was supported by a comprehensive suite of documents. The request was also accompanied by a copy of the planning authority's notice of decision.

The following documents were provided by the applicant's representative to assist the Commission is its review of the decision to not certify the amendment:

• Notice of determination dated 27 February 2026
• Copy of the Council Agenda dated 25 February 2026
• Copy of attachments to Council Agenda dated 25 February 2026
• Unconfirmed Minutes Flinders Council Meeting dated 25 February 2026
• Extract from Flinders Council Minutes dated 16 March 2021
• Letter from the Commission to Flinders planning authority dated 3 November 2025
• Email from Mick Purves Strategic Planner Flinders and attachments, and
• Flinders Island Structure Plan - Draft for Public Consultation dated July 2016.

The planning authority subsequently confirmed that the documents provided by the applicant were the relevant documents.

The Commission also reviewed the recording of the planning authority's consideration of the draft amendment at its meeting on 25 February 2026.

Under section 40B(1) of the Act, the Commission must consider whether it is satisfied that the planning authority took into account, in making its decision the matters referred to in section 38(1), when refusing the request for the amendment.

A planning authority, before deciding whether to prepare a draft amendment of an LPS in relation to a municipal area in accordance with a request under section 37(1), must be satisfied that such a draft amendment of an LPS will meet the LPS criteria.

The LPS criteria under section 34(2) of the Act are:

(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.

In the council minutes dated 25 February 2026 it was stated: 'As noted in the Assessment Report, AM2025-02 is generally consistent with the majority of the Northern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (regional strategy), however there are specific provisions that allow for local strategy to determine a range of matters on the Furneaux Islands, including competing demands to:

• maintain the natural appearance of the landscape of areas surrounding Marshall Bay (including the subject lands) for their landscape, biodiversity and geodiversity functions, and
• support the rural and agriculture sectors on Flinders Island.

A recommendation was provided for the planning authority to determine whether to certify the combined amendment and permit which stated:

That the planning authority adopts the draft Flinders Structure Plan 2016 as local strategy to inform assessment of AM2025-02 under the Northern Tasmanian Regional Land Use Strategy and:

1. Refuses the application by Van Diemen Consulting on behalf of the owner, to initiate AM2025-02 to the Flinders Local Provisions Schedule under section 40D(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to rezone Certificates of Title 120064/1, 215120/1 & 230282/1 (PID 3513143),part of the 'Markarna Park' property at 368 Five Mile Jim Road, Memana, from Landscape Conservation Zone to Rural Zone under Section 37(1) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (Act), as:
   1. the request was not considered to be practicably consistent with the draft Flinders Structure Plan;
   2. the request was not considered to comply with the requirements of the Northern Tasmanian Regional Land Use Strategy; and
   3. the respective merits of the requested rezoning were not accepted; and
   4. DA2023-038 is refused.

1. Supports the application by Van Diemen Consulting on behalf of the owner, to initiate AM2025-02 to the Flinders Local Provisions Schedule under section 40D(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 to rezone Certificates of Title 120064/1, 215120/1 & 230282/1 (PID 3513143), part of the 'Markarna Park' property at 368 Five Mile Jim Road, Memana, from Landscape Conservation Zone to Rural Zone under Section 37(1) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (Act); and
   1. Pursuant to Section 40F of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, certifies that AM2025-02 meets the LPS criteria; and
   2. Instructs that adjoining property owners and occupiers be notified of draft amendment AM2025-02; and
   3. Under s6, delegate to the General Manager the authority to:
      1. authorise final revisions to the documentation for AM2025-02;
      2. submit notice of the decision to initiate and certify AM2025-02 to the Tasmanian Planning Commission;
      3. complete the statutory notification of AM2025-02;
      4. provide responses to information requests or directions issued by the Commission in their processing of AM2025-02; and
   4. Pursuant to Section 57 and 40Y of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 and the Tasmanian Planning Scheme - Flinders, approve the planning application DA2023-038 for the proposed lime sand pit and associated works and infrastructure, subject to the conditions including Permit Part B Permit Conditions - Environmental No. 11576, EPA Tas, 5 August 2025, and as otherwise determined by the General Manager.

Page 54 of the council agenda dated 25 February 2026 stated:

'....Both the Assessment Report and the Statutory Requirements section of this Agenda Item identify that the central question for AM2025-02 is whether the requested rural zone is consistent with the strategic directions and intents for the wider Marshall Bay landscape identified through the Structure Plan, which is the only available strategy consulted with the Flinders community.

Absent strong submissions by the proponent to address the strategic philosophy for the zoning of the Marshall Bay area within the Structure Plan, it is difficult to identify why a departure to the zoning regime for the Marshall Bay area that was accepted and ultimately approved by the Commission, should be adopted by the Council.

The lack of a clear outcome on the conflict between management of the natural and landscape values established under the Structure Plan with the need to develop and diversity the local agriculture sector suggests that a precautionary approach may be suitable.'

The Commission notes that the regional strategy does acknowledge specific challenges exist in relation to the Furneaux Group of islands and that local strategies may be adopted to address those challenges.

It is apparent from the documentation submitted to the planning authority in the planning advisers report, that considerable reliance was placed on the document referred to as the Draft Flinders Structure Plan 2016.

The Commission notes that references to the subject site occur throughout the draft Flinders structure plan 2016 (Structure Plan) below:

Page 20 - 'Open Space linkages with large vegetation patches on Crown land, on Local Authority land adjacent to the Lady Barron Waste Transfer station and on Vinegar Hill are also important. Further north threatened species are mapped at very high density on several individual allotments at Long Point Centre Hill and Killiecrankie. Threatened ecological communities occur in large patches at NE River; east of Palana Road near West End Road intersection; at Leeka and West End; along Boat Harbour Creek; adjacent to Killiecrankie, Limestone and Marshall Bays; north of the Dock; on Quoin Hill and at NE River.'

Page 36 - 'There are locations where loss of vegetation is unacceptable, for example, Marshall Bay where intensification of development is not warranted and where grazing is encouraged to reduce and ultimately cease as a use. The land adjacent to the length of Marshall Bay is potentially subject to extreme erosion and the Tasmanian land classification (Classification 6-7) confirms its unsuitability for grazing. An allotment near the Long Point Road and Palana Road intersection, Centre Hill and two Quoin allotments have the highest density of listed threatened species on the island.'

Page 37 - 'The residential enclave at West End has potential for further holiday home development with some constraints in relation to visibility across Marshall Bay from Emita and clearance of vegetation. No further subdivision on the vegetated slopes above West End Road addresses the issue of land slip and fire hazard management, and will also reduce the potential visual impacts. Below the road, adjacent to the coast, there is some potential for further development of housing that minimises visual impacts from Marshall Bay/Emita. A minimum lot size of 10ha is proposed in this coastal location. Land division should ensure that frontage to the coast is approximately 150-200 metres to retain the amenity of the beach front area in keeping with current character.'

It appears from the record of the planning authority deliberations, that the planning authority at its meeting on 25 February 2026 resolved to adopt the Structure Plan and consider its application to the request to certify the combined draft amendment and permit.

1. The Commission notes that in the planning adviser report and in the report before the planning authority, reliance was placed on the application of the Structure Plan.
2. It was submitted that the applicability and reliance on the Structure Plan was said to derive from the regional strategy, with the Structure Plan being adopted by the planning authority.
3. The Commission notes that while it is not a matter for the Commission to decide, it is questionable whether the Structure Plan has any status that is derived for the regional strategy.
4. The Commission also notes, that the fact that the Commission previously considered the Structure Plan in its assessment of the draft Flinders LPS, does not preclude its further consideration in application to a request for a subsequent amendment to the draft LPS.
5. In any event, even if the Structure Plan does derive some status from the regional strategy, that is not solely determinative of the matter. In considering the application of the LPS criteria to a requested amendment, the test for the application of the regional strategy is that a proposed amendment is 'in so far as practicable consistent with the regional strategy'. The planning authority could determine that the positive application of the other LPS criteria results in it not being practicable for the amendment to be consistent with the regional strategy.
6. Whether or not the existence and application of the Structure Plan have any relevance to the consideration of any of, or application to, other LPS criteria that the planning authority must consider, is a matter for the planning authority.
7. While it is not a factor in the Commission's decision, the Commission further observes that it appears that the Structure Plan was formally adopted for the purpose of consideration of the requested amendment. The Commission is uncertain as to whether the Structure Plan is being adopted effectively on a 'case by case' basis or has ongoing application to the planning authority's decision making. In fairness to any applicant for an amendment, the existence and status of any strategic or structure plan and its ongoing application in planning authority decision making must be a public document able to be ascertained by an applicant, so that any matters relevant to the amendment request, can be addressed in an application.

Consideration of section 40(B)

(1) A person, within 14 days of receiving a notice under section 38(3) that the planning authority has decided not to prepare a draft amendment of an LPS in accordance with the person's request, may request the Commission to determine whether the Commission is satisfied that the planning authority took into account, in making its decision, the matters referred to in section 38(1).

1. The role of the Commission under section 40B(1) is limited. It does not require that the Commission reviews the planning merit of the planning authority's decision. Rather, it requires that the Commission is satisfied that the planning authority took into account the LPS criteria.

1. At the meeting on 25 February 2026 the planning authority had before it a planning adviser report that provided advice on application of the LPS criteria to the draft amendment. The report provided options. It indicated that the amendment could meet the LPS criteria and indicated that it could be refused principally placing reliance on the Structure Plan.
2. The Commission review of the discussions at the planning authority meeting, recorded on video indicated that the planning authority did not consider the proposal in the context of the advised LPS criteria. The planning authority essentially considered two matters:
   • that the area of land for which the draft amendment to rural zoning was sought, was too large an area of land
   • observations were also about the benefit of access to the sand resource to the economy of the island
3. The Commission has reviewed all the information and finds that while the planning adviser report before the planning authority did provide advice on the application of the LPS criteria, the deliberations of the planning authority indicate that the full suite of the LPS criteria and their relevance and application to the draft amendment were not considered. One of the options presented by the planning adviser report indicated that the draft amendment could meet the LPS criteria. However, the merits of that option by reference to the LPS criteria was not considered.

1. After reviewing the documents provided by the applicant, which were confirmed by the planning authority to be all the relevant documents, and viewing the video recording of the meeting, I am satisfied the planning authority was provided with enough information to determine whether the requested amendment met the LPS criteria. I also consider it clear that the planning authority did not take the LPS criteria into account in making its decision.

In accordance with section 40B(4)(a) of the Act, the Commission directs the planning authority to reconsider whether to prepare a draft amendment in relation to a request made on behalf of Markarna Grazing Company Pty Ltd, considered by the planning authority on 25 February 2026.