Applicant 6tyo Pty Ltd for Honeywell Property Pty Ltd

The draft amendment is modified under section 40N(1)(b) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 as set out in Annexure A and is approved under section 40Q.

The permit is modified under section 42B(1)(b)(ii) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993, as set out in Annexure B.

The draft amendment proposes to insert site-specific qualification 17.3 to allow for Hospital Services as a discretionary use in the Commercial Zone at 217-229 Wellington Street, Launceston.

The permit provides for a private hospital at 215 and 217-229 Wellington Street, Launceston. The proposed development includes:

• demolition the existing buildings on the site
• construction a new hospital providing:
  • five levels of hospital rooms, including 10 operating theatres, 104 hospital beds, two endoscopy units, an infusion unit, a laboratory, and a pharmacy
  • 116 car parking spaces over three levels within the southern half of the building
• alterations to the existing vehicle accesses to Wellington Street, and
• erection of signs, including illuminated signage.

The draft amendment applies to 217-229 Wellington Street (folio of the Register 54092/1), while the planning permit application proposes development of a hospital across 215 (folio of the Register 42371/1) and 217-229 Wellington Street (the site).

Both titles are zoned Commercial, which ordinarily prohibits the use of Hospital Services.

Number 215 Wellington Street has an area of 1,676m2 and currently contains health services, including the Launceston Medical Urgent Care Clinic and the Launceston Respiratory Clinic, which are associated with the Launceston Health Hub. An existing SSQ to allow for Hospital Services as a discretionary use 215 Wellington Street (also known as 213-215 Wellington Street) already applies.

Number 217-229 Wellington Street has an area of 1,819m2 and currently contains commercial businesses. The site adjoins the Launceston General Hospital (LGH) and an associated multi-storey car park to the east, and the Launceston Eye Doctors to the south. The site has frontage and vehicle access from Wellington Street.

Land to the east of the site is zoned Community Purpose (LGH), land to the north and south is zoned Commercial, and land to the west is zoned Utilities (Wellington Street and Midland Highway).

The airport obstacle limitation area and low and medium landslip hazard band overlays apply to the site. The Potentially Contaminated Land Code also applies to use and development of the land as the site may have been used for potentially contaminating activities in the past, including a woodchip mill, engine works, joinery workshop, mechanics workshop, and a service station.

The site has existing connections to reticulated water, sewer and stormwater services.

The draft amendment was referred to TasWater under sections 56S and 56O of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008. In response, TasWater made a representation stating it had no objection to the draft amendment and did not wish to attend a hearing. TasWater otherwise provided a submission to planning authority notice (SPAN) providing conditions to be included with the planning permit, if granted.

The planning authority advised that no other representations about the draft amendment or draft planning permit were received.

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 Tasmanian Planning Scheme - Launceston Local Provisions Schedule (LPS) and the representations, statements and recommendations contained in the planning authority's section 40K report, any information obtained at a hearing, and any technical matters.
2. Under section 40L(2) of the Act, the Commission dispensed with holding a hearing as the representor (TasWater) notified the Commission it did not wish to attend the 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. If an SSQ is proposed in a draft amendment, the Commission must consider whether it meets the criteria of section 32(4) of the Act. According to section 32(4), an LPS may only include a SSQ if:

(a) a use or development to which the provision relates is of significant social, economic or environmental benefit to the State, a region or a municipal area; or

(b) the area of land has particular environmental, economic, social or spatial qualities that require provisions, that are unique to the area of land, to apply to the land in substitution for, or in addition to, or modification of, the provisions of the SPPs.

1. Where relevant, these matters are discussed in the sections below.

1. The relevant regional land use strategy is the Northern Tasmania Regional Land Use Strategy (regional strategy), 23 June 2021.
2. The supporting planning report by 6tyo Pty Ltd (planning report) submitted that Launceston, being the Principal Activity Centre for the northern region, is the primary hub for services in the region. The planning report contended a new private hospital in an established healthcare precinct would further strengthen the provision of essential services in the region.
3. The applicant's planning report submitted that the draft amendment meets the Economic Development and Liveability strategic directions of the regional strategy for the following reasons:
   • the draft amendment seeks to facilitate the use and development of a site that is within an existing health services precinct for a new private in-patient hospital
   • the location of the site beside the LGH will further strengthen the healthcare precinct in the area
   • the proximity of the site to other healthcare services will allow the new hospital and the LGH to work together where possible to alleviate pressure on the public health system and provide ease of access for patients and staff moving between the sites
   • the proposal will facilitate the re-development of existing commercial land for a new purpose in a strategic location close to existing health facilities and the arterial road network
   • the future hospital will generate jobs through its design and construction phase as well as ongoing employment for healthcare and support staff
   • the strategies identified to achieve this Strategic Direction (G1.2 - Economic Development) focus on coordination of infrastructure and transport with land use planning to maximise efficiency
   • the proposed amendment will facilitate the development of a new hospital adjacent to the existing LGH and other healthcare services in the immediate area
   • the co-location of services offers efficiency for transport and access to a wide range of health services
   • the site is located in a central part of Launceston with good access to transport routes and public transport options
   • Launceston is identified in the regional strategy as the Principal Activity Centre in the region
   • it is appropriate for a new major healthcare facility to be located in an established healthcare hub within the city
   • the draft amendment seeks to enable the development of a new hospital in a strategic location close to the existing LGH and the Launceston Health Hub
   • the co-location of these services provides for efficiency and long-term sustainability of essential health services in Launceston
   • the Launceston Health Hub has a record of providing innovative services to the region, including the first 'out of hours' General Practitioner clinic in the area, and
   • the addition of the proposed hospital will continue to expand the range of health services offered and increase the benefit to the community.
4. The planning report also states that the draft amendment meets SI-P02, SI-P03, SI-A05 of the Social Infrastructure and Community Policy regional planning policies. The applicant added the site is centrally located with good access to the public transport network, and a new hospital would assist health services providers to meet an increasing demand for services in the northern region.
5. The planning authority's report supporting the draft amendment (supporting report) submitted that the proposal is consistent with the regional strategy. The supporting report submitted that the proposed amendment specifically seeks to improve the access to health facilities within the growing informal health precinct around the LGH, which would fill a gap in the provision of sufficient hospital beds and theatres to address part of the long waiting lists for elective surgery in the region.

1. The Commission accepts the planning authority and applicant's assessment that the draft amendment is consistent with the regional strategy, particularly its policies related to economic development and liveability.
2. Table E.2 of the regional strategy identifies major health care facilities as components of the government and community land uses that are encouraged in the Launceston Principal Activity Centre.
3. The Commission notes that regional activity centre policy RAC-P16 encourages effective spatial distribution of social facilities and services to the community and consideration the co-location of facilities and services within the activity centre network.
4. The Commission also notes that regional activity centre policies RAC-P1, RAC-P2, and RAC-P10 encourage the following outcomes:
   • the reuse and redevelopment of existing buildings and land to integrate a mix of land uses including the coordinated provision of residential development, retail, commercial, business, administration, social and community facilities, public and active transport provision, and associated infrastructure
   • the reinforcing of the role of the Launceston Principal Activity Centre, and
   • the incorporation of a range of land uses into activity centres appropriate to their role and function within the Activity Centres Hierarchy.
5. The Commission finds the draft amendment would provide for the redevelopment of an existing inner-city site with health services use that is located in a strategic location close to the existing LGH and the Launceston Health Hub. Furthermore, the site is connected to public transport networks, and the use would support the role and function of Launceston as the Principal Activity Centre in the northern region.
6. The Commission is satisfied that the draft amendment is, as far as practicable, consistent with the regional strategy.

1. The planning authority's supporting report submitted that the draft amendment has regard to, and is generally consistent with, the relevant principles and goals of the City of Launceston Strategic Plan 2025-2035, particularly goals 1.2, 1.3, and 3.2.
2. The planning authority submitted that the draft amendment aligns with the strategic priorities by providing community engagement, providing significant investment in healthcare in Launceston, and contributing to the growing healthcare precinct in the area.
3. The planning authority also submitted that the draft amendment furthers the sustainable development of the Launceston Health Hub, which will assist the city in meeting some of its key measures for success relating to health and wellbeing.

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

Section 32(4) of the Act

1. The applicant's planning report submitted that the hospital would create significant social and economic benefit for Launceston and the surrounding region.
2. The applicant submitted the hospital would include:
   • 10 operating theatres
   • 104 beds
   • two endoscopy units
   • an infusion unit
   • a laboratory
   • a pharmacy, and
   • a 116-space car parking facility.
3. The applicant stated the project had a total estimated cost of approximately $174m, which would be a significant economic investment in Launceston. The applicant added the project would be supported by funding from the Tasmanian Government, with the hospital to be available to treat both public and private patients.
4. The applicant submitted that the new hospital will be a significant employer and is expected to attract staff and their families to the area. The applicant also stated the hospital would help alleviate existing and persistent pressure on the Tasmanian health system.
5. The applicant also noted that the site will form part of an established health precinct beside the LGH, Launceston Eye Doctors, and close to the Launceston Health Hub to the south.
6. In its supporting report, the planning authority stated that the draft amendment is consistent with section 32(4) of the Act, but did not provide any further supporting evidence.

1. The Commission finds the proposed SSQ meets section 32(4) of the Act for the reasons given in the applicant's planning report. The Commission is satisfied the SSQ would provide for Hospital Services use that would create significant social and economic benefit for Launceston and the surrounding region (section 32(4)(a)).
2. The Commission is also satisfied the site has particular spatial, economic and social qualities that require provisions in addition to those of the Commercial Zone (section 32(4)(b)). The site is located within an informal health precinct comprising a mix of readily accessible health services and commercial activities. The Commission notes that Hospital Services is a prohibited use class in the Commercial Zone but considers the use class would not contravene the purpose of the Zone. The SSQ would provide for use and development appropriate for the land and surrounding area.

1. The applicant's planning report submitted that the site, more broadly, forms part of an established health precinct beside the LGH, Launceston Eye Doctors, and close to the Launceston Health Hub at 247 Wellington Street.
2. The planning report noted that 215 Wellington Street already has a site-specific qualification to allow for Hospital Services as a discretionary use. The applicant also noted that a similar site-specific qualification applies to 237-241 and 243-247 Wellington Street. The draft amendment intends to create an identical provision for 217-229 Wellington Street.
3. The supporting documentation from the applicant and planning authority did not state whether rezoning the site to Community Purpose as part of the larger health precinct was considered.

1. The LGH to the east of the site is zoned Community Purpose. The Commission notes it is unclear whether the applicant and planning authority considered rezoning the site to Community Purpose. Nevertheless, 215 Wellington Street already has a site-specific qualification to allow for Hospital Services. In this instance, the Commission agrees it is appropriate an SSQ also be applied to 217-229 Wellington Street to provide for the proposed hospital. While a case to rezone the site to Community Purpose may have been made, use of an SSQ will allow the current Commercial Zone applied along Wellington Street to remain intact.

State Policies and Schedule 1 Objectives of the Act

1. Both the planning authority and applicant submitted that the State Coastal Policy 1996 and State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 are not relevant to the draft amendment.
2. The planning authority submitted that the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 is also not relevant to the draft amendment as the subject site is within an urban area that is fully serviced by existing reticulated water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure.
3. The planning authority's supporting report stated that the draft amendment is 'not inconsistent' with the National Environment Protection Measure (NEPM) for assessment of site contamination. The planning authority submitted that the site is potentially contaminated due to past uses, which may include a woodchip mill, engine works, joinery workshop, mechanics workshop, and a service station. The planning authority noted that any future use and development of the land will need to meet the Potentially Contaminated Land Code in the State Planning Provisions (SPPs).

1. The Commission notes that the draft amendment will provide for a sensitive use and the permit application will be subject to assessment under the Potentially Contaminated Land Code of the SPPs. The Commission therefore finds the draft amendment is not inconsistent with the NEPM for assessment of site contamination.
2. The Commission finds that no other State policies are relevant to the draft amendment.
3. The Commission finds that the draft amendment furthers the objectives set out in Schedule 1 of the Act as it promotes orderly and sustainable use and development of land and community health through the collocation of health facilities in an existing informal precinct.

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. Section 34(2)(a) of the Act requires that a draft amendment of an LPS contains all the provisions that the SPPs specify must be contained in an LPS. LP1.6.1 of the SPPs requires that SSQs 'must be shown on the overlay maps, annotated with the reference number and all information requirements completed in a relevant list in the LPS.'
3. While the certified draft amendment includes a complete listing for the table at LAU-Site-specific Qualifications, it does not include a map showing the SSQ hatching and annotation applying to the subject site.
4. The draft amendment is modified by applying a hatched overlay and annotation to the subject site as described in section 3.3 of the Commission's Practice Note 7 - Draft LPS mapping: technical advice. Furthermore, a minor modification to the listing in table LAU-Site-specific Qualifications is also made to ensure the listing is consistent with grammatical conventions.

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

1. Under section 40T(1) of the Act, a person who requests a planning authority under section 37 to amend an LPS may also:

(a) make an application to the planning authority for a permit, which permit could not be issued unless the LPS were amended as requested; and

(b) request the planning authority to consider the request to amend the LPS and the application for a permit at the same time.

1. Under section 42A of the Act, the Commission must consider the permit and, under section 42B, review the planning authority's decision as reported under section 42.
2. As discussed above, the permit sought is for the use and development of a hospital at 215 and 217-229 Wellington Street. As such, the development application must be considered against the applicable standards in the Commercial Zone and applicable codes in the SPPs.

Assessment against the provisions of the planning scheme

1. The supporting reports submitted by the applicant and planning authority provided an assessment of the proposal against the relevant planning scheme provisions.
2. As discussed above, the site is in the Commercial Zone and the airport obstacle limitation area and low and medium landslip hazard band overlays apply to the site. The Potentially Contaminated Land Code is also applicable to the proposal.
3. The Commission, in reviewing the planning authority's assessment, considers the proposal meets the relevant acceptable solutions of the applicable zone and codes, with the exception of those discussed in further detail below.

1. The planning authority's supporting report submitted that the hospital would operate 24 hours per day and did not meet Acceptable Solution A1.
2. The planning authority submitted that there are three dwellings in the Inner Residential Zone within 50m of the proposed hospital on the southern side of Frankland Street that immediately border the LGH car park. The properties are within 35m of the site.
3. The planning authority submitted that the proposed hospital meets Performance Criteria P1 as the amenity of the residential properties on Frankland Street has already been diminished due to the proximity of the land to the LGH and its car park. Furthermore, the planning authority stated the use would not emit significant noise, lighting, or create other nuisances, including from the proposed car park, that would unreasonably impact residential amenity.
4. The Commission notes the planning authority's submission and is satisfied the performance criteria is met.

1. There is no Acceptable Solution for A1. The planning authority submitted that the proposed hospital complies with Performance Criteria P1 as the site is part of an informal health precinct created by the LGH and other medical facilities in the immediate area.
2. The planning authority considered that this informal health precinct is located on the southern fringe of the Launceston CBD and surrounding commercial area and will further consolidate, rather than diminish, the activity centre hierarchy.
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied.

Development standards - 17.4.1 Building height A1/P1

1. The planning authority's supporting report submitted that the hospital building will have a maximum height of 29m (31.5m including the lift overrun) and did not meet the Acceptable Solution A1, which specifies buildings must not exceed 12m in height.
2. The supporting report submitted that the proposed hospital building complies with Performance Criteria P1 as it is compatible with the streetscape and character of development existing on established properties in the area. In this regard, the planning authority submitted that the existing buildings on the site are proposed to be demolished, and the new hospital will be five levels. The planning authority submitted that as the slope of the site continues to rise to the east, the dominant feature is the adjacent multi-storey car park and helipad buildings of the LGH, both of which are substantially taller than the proposed building. The planning authority submitted that when viewed from Wellington Street, the proposed hospital will be a prominent building in the streetscape but must be considered in the context of the taller buildings it would adjoin.
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied.

1. The planning authority submitted that the hospital building is to be constructed to the boundary at the northern end of the site and has a varying setback of up to around 7m across the frontage.
2. The planning authority submitted that in some areas landscaping to a depth greater than 5.5m is proposed, and in other areas across the frontage the landscaping is, by necessity, less that the prescribed 5.5m. Therefore, the proposal does not meet the Acceptable Solution.
3. The planning authority submitted that the performance criteria is met as substantial landscaping of the frontage is proposed.
4. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied. The proposed landscaping would be provided along the frontage and would enhance the amenity and appearance of the streetscape.

C1.6 Development Standards for Buildings and Works

1. The planning authority submitted that the proposed wall signs exceed the prescribed maximum area of 4.5m2 and the transom sign does not satisfy the requirement for a minimum height above ground of 3.6m. Therefore, the proposal does not meet the Acceptable Solution.
2. The planning authority submitted that the proposed signs, including six wall signs, one building fascia sign, and one transom sign (including a small 'exit' sign), meet Performance Criteria P1 and are compatible with the streetscape for the following reasons:

(a) the signs are located within an applicable zone as set out in Table C1.6

(b) having regard to the prescribed matters, the signs are considered to be compatible with the streetscape

(i) the wall signs range in size from 39.1m2 (south facing wall) to 5.76m2 (east facing wall, oriented to Frankland Street). Significantly, the size of the larger signs is mitigated by their elevated location on their respective walls. The transom and building fascia signs are compatible with their intended purpose to identify entry to the building and the car park

(ii) the proposed building is a substantial structure, being a 29m-tall, five-storey building

(iii) the site is within the Commercial Zone and the area is dominated by the LGH and other medical facilities. The proposed signage is intended to be backlit, which will soften its visual impact, and is not considered to unreasonably impact on the amenity of surrounding properties

(iv) other than the entry signs for the building and car park, the six wall signs all depict the name and logo of the facility, albeit spread over the east, north, west, and south facing elevations. The separation of the signs effectively negates the sense of repetition

(v) the existing buildings on the site contain several signs representing the different activities on each site. Other buildings in the immediate vicinity and sight lines (e.g. the Hub and Bob Jane T-Mart) display many signs and visual images. Further south is the McDonalds outlet with its corporate signage, and

(vi) there will be no impact on the safe movement of vehicles and pedestrians.

1. The Commission notes the planning authority's submission and is satisfied the performance criteria is met.

1. The planning authority submitted that two wall signs are proposed for the Wellington Street façade of the hospital building, which does not meet the limit of one sign of each sign type prescribed in Acceptable Solution A1.
2. The planning authority submitted that the two wall signs proposed on the Wellington Street frontage are separated approximately 16m horizontally and 15m vertically and meet Performance Criteria P3.
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied. Given the length of the property frontage, the signs would not cause an unreasonable level of visual clutter in the streetscape.

1. There is no acceptable solution for C1.6.2. Performance Criteria P1 requires that an illuminated sign must not cause an unreasonable loss of amenity to adjacent properties or have an unreasonable effect on the safety, appearance or efficiency of a road, and must be compatible with the streetscape. All of the proposed signs would be illuminated. The planning authority submitted that the proposed backlit illuminated signage will not cause an unreasonable loss of amenity to adjacent properties, will not have an unreasonable impact on the safety, appearance or efficiency of a road, and are compatible with the streetscape.
2. The planning authority noted that 215 Wellington Street currently contains large, illuminated billboards and is diagonally opposite other illuminated billboard signage 45m to the north-west.
3. The planning authority submitted that the illuminated signs will be compatible and not intrusive in the streetscape, and satisfy Performance Criteria P1 for the following reasons:

(a) the signs are to be located on all four sides of the proposed hospital building. Five of the signs will be not less than 14m above ground level and the remaining signs (including one stating only ENTRY) will be adjacent to the building or car park entrance

(b) the signage varies in size from the 0.75m2 entry sign to the 39.1m2 sign on the southern wall

(c) the signage is expected to operate 24 hours per day as will the hospital

(d) the purpose of the signage is to advise the location of the hospital

(e) the subject site is on the curve of Wellington Street, with limited north to south view lines, although it will be visible from distant residential areas to the west. The proposed backlighting is relatively subtle, and the site will be seen with the backdrop of the LGH buildings and, as such, is unlikely to unreasonably impact upon those distant views

(f) the signs are static, and

(g) the proposed signage is suitably separated from electronic traffic signals such that there will be no conflict or confusion with traffic control devices.

1. The planning authority noted the level of illumination of the signs was not specified by the applicant. The planning authority therefore recommended a condition be included on the permit to require the degree of illumination to remain at or below 1200 nit.
2. The Commission notes the planning authority's submission and is satisfied the performance criteria is met subject to the condition recommended by the planning authority to limit the brightness of the illumination.

1. The planning authority submitted that Acceptable Solution A1 is not met as there is no statement in the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) or traffic response (prepared by GHD) that the loading bay is designed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.2-2002, Parking facilities, Part 2: Off­street commercial vehicle facilities.
2. The planning authority submitted that the loading bay meets Performance Criteria P1 for the following reasons:

(a) the loading bay will be used for deliveries for the hospital

(b) the TIA confirms the loading bay is 3.5m x 9m and suitable for access by an 8.8m medium rigid vehicles, which are expected to deliver goods to the site

(c) delivery vehicles are expected every day, during normal working hours

(d) a turning area is included in the car park to serve the loading bay, and

(e) the site is level.

1. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied.

C3.5.1 Traffic generation at a vehicle crossing, level crossing or new junction A1/P1

1. The planning authority submitted that Acceptable Solution A1.4 is not met as the increase in daily traffic movement will be more than the 10% increase allowed under Table C3.1.
2. The planning authority submitted that vehicular traffic to and from the site meets Performance Criteria P1 for the following reasons:

(a) the crossover to 213-215 Wellington Street will be removed and all hospital traffic will be directed over the redesigned crossovers to 217-229 Wellington Street. The volume of the increase is undetermined as there is no data to determine the current usage

(b) the traffic will largely be staff and visitors to the hospital, using domestic-scale vehicles

(c) access to and from the site is via Wellington Street, to the south of its separation from the Southern Outlet

(d) the speed limit at the point of access is 50kph

(e) there is no available alternative access

(f) the proponents have identified a need for a new hospital in the region

(g) ..., and

(h) the Council is the road authority at the point of access and the Council traffic engineers are satisfied that there will be minimal impact on the road network and road safety.

1. For clause (g) the planning authority submitted that the TIA concluded that 'no significant detrimental road safety impacts are foreseen as a result of the proposed development.'
2. The TIA stated that:
   • the existing crash history does not suggest any specific road safety deficiencies in the surrounding road network that might be exacerbated by the additional traffic generated by the proposed development
   • there is sufficient sight distance at the proposed access points to the subject site
   • the access points have been designed in accordance with the relevant standard to enable egress for all vehicles in a forward direction, and
   • the traffic generated by the proposed development can be accommodated at key intersections including:
     • the Midland Highway and Howick Street intersection, and
     • the Wellington Street and Howick Street intersection.
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied for the reasons provided by the planning authority and in the TIA. Whilst there will be an increase in traffic movement, there are mitigating factors including Wellington Street hosting one way traffic, and sufficient sight distances at the proposed access points to the site.

Use standards - C14.5.1 Suitability for intended use

1. The planning authority submitted that Acceptable Solution A1 is not met as the Director has made no determination about the suitability of the land under the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994.
2. The planning authority submitted that the proposal meets Performance Criteria P1 as a preliminary site investigation by ES&D Consulting concluded that the site was suitable for the intended use and recommended several management measures.
3. For 215 Wellington Street, the site investigation (dated 8/5/2024) stated:

ES&D recommends that the site is suitable for the proposed ongoing commercial use and does not pose an unacceptable risk to public health. > > The development can proceed with the following management measures:

• Encountering widespread petroleum-based hydrocarbon contamination at the site is unlikely, but during excavation, if odour or discolouration is detected, re-assess with a photoionisation (PID) meter. If vapour is detected this management measure will need to be reassessed. Standard excavation type PPE is required.
• If the excavation is planned for more than 150 cubic metres, test to check for acid-sulphate soil and plan the necessary actions as the site is very close to coastal acid sulphate soil as indicated in the LISTMap.
• A pre-demolition asbestos plan should be made to avoid exposure if there is an underlying risk of asbestos on site.

1. For 217-229 Wellington Street the site investigation (dated 11/5/2024) stated:

ES&D recommends that the site is suitable for the proposed ongoing commercial use and does not pose an unacceptable risk to public health. > > The development can proceed with the following management measures:

• Post demolition of the current building, test pitting to check for the presence of underground petroleum storage systems must be undertaken. The ground penetrating radar report indicates that there may be a tank at the front of the site under hardstand areas at a depth of around 50cm below the surface. This presents the possibility that other tanks might also be present under the current building.
• A UPSS decommissioning report (EPA regulated) will be required if tanks are detected. This will clear the site. Offsite impacts will also be managed by the EPA regulation. It is considered that use as a car park will be able to be achieved and decommissioning processes will not prevent this from being achieved.

1. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied.

1. The planning authority submitted that Acceptable Solution A1 is not met as the development is 'likely' to involve more than 250m3 of excavation.
2. The planning authority submitted that the proposal meets Performance Criteria P1 as the site investigation by ES&D Consulting concluded that the risk during development to subsurface workers and future site users is low and does not pose an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. The planning authority noted the management measures recommended above, and included a condition on the draft permit that would require the development to be undertaken in accordance with the management measures.
3. The Commission accepts the planning authority's submission and agrees the performance criteria is satisfied.

1. The Commission finds that the draft permit furthers the Objectives at Schedule 1 of the Act.

1. The TasWater notice to the planning authority provided conditions to be included in the permit under the provisions of sections 56P and 56S of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008.
2. Condition 3 of the TasWater notice requires the developer to pay a fee for the assessment of the development and for consent to register a legal document. This condition is not for a proper planning purpose[1] and must be removed from the planning permit but may be included as a note of advice.

1. The Commission modifies the conditions attached to the permit granted by the planning authority, as set out above, and as contained in Annexure B of the decision. Several minor modifications have been made to the draft permit conditions to improve the clarity of the permit.

Modified amendment PSA-LLP0028 - Tasmanian Planning Scheme - Launceston

1. Insert site-specific qualification LAU-17.3 in LAU-Site-specific Qualifications as follows:

Description (modification, substitution or addition)

An additional Discretionary Use Class for this site is: Hospital Services

1. Amend the planning scheme maps to insert the site-specific qualification overlay LAU-17.3 on 217-229 Wellington Street, Launceston, as follows:

The use and development must be carried out in accordance with the endorsed plans and documents to the satisfaction of the Senior Leader City Development unless modified by a condition of the permit:

1. Cover Sheet, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA000, dated 22/11/2024
2. Location Plan, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA001, dated 22/11/2024
3. Proposed Scheme Axonometric Diagram, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA003, dated 22/11/2024
4. Ground Level Layout, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA004, dated 22/11/2024
5. Car Park / Level 1 (Antresole), prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA005, dated 22/11/2024
6. Car Park / Level 2 (Upper Level), prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA006, dated 22/11/2024
7. Level 2, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA007, dated 22/11/2024
8. Level 3, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA008, dated 22/11/2024
9. Level 4, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA009, dated 22/11/2024
10. Level 5, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA010, dated 22/11/2024
11. Level 6 / Roof Plant, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA011, dated 22/11/2024
12. Elevation - Western, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA012, dated 22/11/2024
13. Elevation - Southern & Northern, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA013, dated 22/11/2024
14. Elevation - Eastern, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA014, dated 22/11/2024
15. Sections, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217- 219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA015, dated 22/11/2024
16. Shadow Diagram, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA016, dated 22/11/2024
17. Gross Floor Area (GFA), prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA017, dated 22/11/2024
18. Perspective Views, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA018, dated 22/11/2024
19. Photomontages & Interior Views, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA019, dated 22/11/2024
20. Materials Board Sheet, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA020, dated 22/11/2024
21. Signage, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA021, dated 22/11/2024

1. Frankland Street Rooftop Plant Space Visibility Diagram, prepared by SKAr, job no. 23-005b, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue 2, page DA022, dated 22/11/2024

1. Design Statement, prepared by SKAr, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, dated 26/08/2024

1. Traffic Impact Assessment, prepared by GHD, project no. 12636211, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, revision A, dated 27/06/2024

1. Letter - response to RFI re. traffic, prepared by GHD, project no. 12636211, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, dated 04/12/2024
2. Preliminary Site Investigation (Stage 1 & 3), prepared by ES&D Consulting, job no. 9142C, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue Final, dated 11/05/2024
3. Preliminary Site Investigation (Stage 2 & 3), prepared by ES&D Consulting, job no. 9142C, Launceston Private Hospital, 215 & 217-219 Wellington Street, Launceston, issue Final, dated 08/05/2024
4. Environmental Review and Advice, prepared by Abacus Environmental, Launceston Private Hospital, 213-215 Wellington Street, Launceston, dated 18/11/2024

All development and use associated with the proposal must be confined to the legal title of the subject land except construction of access from the street.

The development must comply with the requirements of TasWater as detailed in the form Submission to Planning Authority Notice, Reference No. TWDA 2024/01068-LCC, dated 27/08/2025 and attached to the permit, except for condition 3.

1. Unless otherwise approved in writing by the Senior Leader Health and Compliance construction activities must only be carried out between the hours of:
   1. Monday to Friday - 7am to 6pm; and
   2. Saturday - 8am to 6pm.
2. Notwithstanding the above paragraph, construction activities must not be carried out on public holidays that are observed State-wide (Easter Tuesday excepted).

The signs must be constructed and maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Council.

The illuminated signs permitted by this permit must have a maximum luminance level of 1200 nit and must only be illuminated during the operating hours of the business.

Flashing or intermittent lighting must not be used in the signs permitted by this permit.

7. REQUIREMENT FOR OFFSITE PARKING PROVISION TO BE MAINTAINED*

In the event that off-site parking for the Launceston Health Hub within No. 213-215 Wellington Street is made unavailable during construction for a cumulative period of longer than 6 months, additional private car parking shall be secured by the applicant for use by Launceston Health Hub staff. The additional parking shall:

1. be located within a 200m radius of the Launceston Health Hub;
2. be made available for use by Launceston Health Hub staff until such a time as parking for Launceston Health Hub staff is made available within this development; and
3. increase the off-site staff car parking for Launceston Health Hub to no fewer than 34 parking spaces or make other arrangements to provide the parking to the satisfaction of the Senior Leader City Development.

Evidence of an agreement for the provision of the parking must be provided to the Senior Leader City Development prior to the parking within No. 213-215 Wellington Street becoming unavailable.

The developer is liable for all costs associated with the repair of damage to Council infrastructure resulting from non-compliance with the conditions of the planning permit and any by-law or legislation relevant to the development activity on the site. Damage may also include the undertaking of unauthorised works to Council infrastructure such as driveways, footpaths and stormwater infrastructure. The developer will also be liable for all reasonable costs associated with the enforcement of compliance with the conditions, by-laws and legislation relevant to the development activity on the site.

9. WORKS WITHIN/OCCUPATION OF THE ROAD RESERVE*

All works in (or requiring the occupation of) the road reserve must be carried out in accordance with a detailed Traffic Management Plan prepared by a qualified person in accordance with the requirements of Australian Standard AS1742. A copy of such plan is to be maintained on site and available for inspection upon request by an Authorised Officer.

The explicit permission of the Executive Leader Community Assets and Design is required prior to undertaking works where the works:

1. require a road or lane closure;
2. require occupation of the road reserve for more than one week at a particular location;
3. are in nominated high traffic locations; or
4. involve opening or breaking trafficable surfaces.

Where the work is associated with the installation, removal or modification of a driveway or a stormwater connection, the approval of a permit for such works shall form the explicit approval.

Any works in the road reserve, or requiring the occupation of the road reserve, must be undertaken by, or under the supervision of an appropriately qualified tradesman/contractor.

Where it is necessary for works to occur within the road reserve or for the occupation of the road reserve, the express written permission of the General Manager, Infrastructure & Assets Network is required. Application for the occupation of Wellington Street must be made 14 days prior to the date of the scheduled occupation or works and detailing (but not limited to):

1. the nature, dates, and duration of the occupation and/or works;
2. the contractor/s undertaking the works;
3. the traffic management works that are employed to provide for the continued safe use of the road reserve by pedestrians and vehicles;
4. any alternative pedestrian routes to be provided where the existing footpath in Wellington Street is unavailable for use due to the works and/or occupation; and
5. any temporary works required to maintain the serviceability of the road or footpath.

A permission issued for any occupation and/or works may be subject to conditions specifying or limiting any of the above listed matters.

Inspections must be arranged and undertaken prior to the commencement of the occupation and at the completion of the works.

Prior to the placement of any skip bin, security fencing, hoarding, shipping containers, site offices, or amenities within a local highway, the person, corporation or other legal entity undertaking the placement must seek and have issued a permit pursuant to the Facilities and Highways By-Law (No. 1 of 2021). The payment of the scheduled Occupation Fee (comprising a minimum base fee and a square metre weekly rate) is required prior to the occupation commencing. No occupation of the road reserve is permitted without approval.

12. AMENITY COMMERCIAL USE - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND POLLUTION CONTROL ACT (EMPCA)

The activity must be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 and regulations thereunder. The construction phase and on-going use on this site must not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbouring properties and the general locality by reason of the processes carried on; the transportation of materials, goods or commodities to or from the subject land; the works or materials; the emission of noise, artificial light, glare, vibration, odour, smoke, dust, waste water, waste products, oil or any other source of nuisance.

Exterior lighting and security lighting is to comply with the Australian Standard AS4282 'Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting' or any subsequent versions. External lighting, excluding any security lighting and approved illuminated signs, must not operate within the hours of 11.00pm to 6.00am.

No burning of any waste materials, including removed vegetation, generated by the development is to be undertaken on-site. Any such waste materials are to be removed to a licensed waste disposal facility (e.g. Launceston Waste Centre), reclaimed, or recycled.

The developer must comply with the Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) reports prepared by Rod Cooper (dated 08/05/2024 and 11/05/2024 ES&D), following all management measures outlined in these reports.

Any new information which comes to light during remediation, demolition or construction works which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination and remediation must be notified to Council (and the Environment Protection Authority if relevant) immediately upon discovery.

In the event that an out of hours concrete pour is required, the Senior Leader Health and Compliance must be notified in writing no fewer than seven business days prior to the pour.

All other concrete pours must comply with the permitted hours of construction.

At least seven days prior to scheduled out of hours concrete pours, the applicant must:

1. notify, via a letterbox drop, all neighbouring properties that fall wholly or partially within 300m of the development site of the date and time of the planned concrete pour. This notification must provide a direct phone number of the responsible person that complainants can contact regarding noise issues; and
2. provide a copy of the letterbox notification to Council for each planned concrete pour; and
3. keep a register of complaints received regarding concrete pours.

Commercial vehicle movements and the unloading and loading of commercial vehicles for a use, excluding Emergency Services, must be within the hours of:

1. 7.00am to 9.00pm Monday to Saturday; and
2. 8.00am to 9.00pm Sunday and public holidays.

*permit conditions modified or included by the decision of the Tasmanian Planning Commission dated 27 February 2026

[1] See Western Australian Planning Commission v Temwood Holding Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 63 at 57 and 60