The draft amendment is approved under section 40Q of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993.

On 17 October 2025, the Commission determined, under section 40N(1)(c)(i) of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act) that draft amendment AMD03-24 should be rejected. The Commission directed the planning authority to submit a substitute draft amendment under section 40N(1)(c)(i).

As part of the same decision, the Commission also refused an associated permit submitted under section 40T of the Act for a three-lot subdivision of land at 11 Upper McEwans Road, Legana on the basis that the proposal was prohibited in absence of the requested amendment.

The initial draft amendment, proposed to apply the Low Density Residential Zone and the WTA-S3.0 Residential Supply and Density Specific Area Plan (SAP) to part of land at 11 Upper McEwans Road, Legana.

The Commission refers to its earlier decision of 17 October 2025 on the initial draft amendment, in which it determined that the evidence presented in support of the proposed modifications (that is, the substitute draft amendment) satisfied the Local Provisions Schedule (LPS) criteria, including the requirements of section 32(4) of the Act.

The substitute draft amendment (the subject of this decision) proposes to apply the Rural Living Zone A to the subject site, remove the SAP applying to part of the site and insert three site specific qualifications (SSQs) to the site. The SSQs allow for one additional lot, introduce reduced setbacks (for a dwelling) and prohibit any increase of stormwater flows to properties to the north of Upper McEwans Road.

The subject site is part of a split-zoned parcel. The entire lot is 1.658ha with approximately 1,000m2 included in the Low Density Residential Zone and the remainder in the Agriculture Zone.

The portion of the site subject to this draft amendment is entirely contained within the Agriculture Zone. The land is subject to the Bushfire-Prone Areas Code and parts of the land are subject to the Landslip Hazard Code.

The site contains an existing dwelling and managed garden. This portion of the land is listed as Urban Areas and the balance of the site is listed as Agricultural land in the TasVeg 4.0 layer. The land is listed as unconstrained in the Land Potentially Suitable for Agriculture layer in the LISTmap.

The land accommodates some standing vegetation and no native grasses identified in the TasVeg mapping.

Land to the north and east of the site is in the Low Density Residential Zone and included in the SAP. Land to the south and west is in the Agriculture Zone.

One representation was received during the exhibition period raising the following issues:

• Location of future buildings and setbacks
• Protection of an existing hedge, and
• Stormwater considerations including drainage easements

The substitute draft amendment was referred to TasWater under section 56S of the Water and Sewerage Industry Act 2008. In response, TasWater made a representation stating 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 considered the representations received and recommended no change to the substitute draft amendment.

1. Under section 40M of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act), the Commission is required to consider the substitute draft amendment to the Local Provisions Schedule (LPS) and the representations, statements and recommendations contained in the planning authority's section 40K report and 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 both representors (including TasWater) confirmed in writing they did not wish to attend 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. Where local provisions are proposed as part of a draft amendment (including SSQs), the Commission must also consider whether the proposal meets the criteria of section 32(4) of the Act. A 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. In its decision dated 17 October 2025, the Commission outlined the following rationale supporting the three SSQs proposed as part of the substitute draft amendment:
   • They enable one additional residential lot as the minimum lot size specified in the Rural Living Zone would prohibit subdivision to create two lots (the lowest minimum lot size is Rural Living Zone A - 1ha). The intent of the SSQ would be to adjust the minimum lot yield possible in this zone for the subject site, to enable subdivision to create one additional lot, while maintaining the Rural Living Zone protections for adjoining agricultural uses and managing development.
   • They enable a dwelling to be sited with generous setbacks to adjoining agricultural land would be appropriate to enhance the protection of adjoining agricultural uses.
   • They manage stormwater flows to the properties to the north of Upper McEwans Road, to ensure there is no increase on overland flows if additional development occurred on the subject site.

1. The Commission refers to its earlier decision dated 17 October 2025 on the initial draft amendment, in which it determined that the evidence presented in support of the proposed modifications (that is, the substitute draft amendment) satisfied the LPS criteria, including the requirements of section 32(4).
2. The Commission remains satisfied that the proposed three SSQs, with applying Rural Living Zone A and removing the SAP from a part of the subject site, as discussed above and outlined in the attachments, appropriately gives effect to section 32(4)(b) of the Act.
3. The Commission finds that no additional evidence or information relating to the substitute draft amendment was submitted, or any new matters raised that would justify altering its position on the three SSQs. The Commission considers that the subject site has particular qualities that are unique within the local area that warrant modification of the SPPs, i.e. unique controls in addition to the Rural Living Zone A to enable potential land use conflicts to be managed and to regulate the intensity of residential uses on the subject site.

1. The relevant regional land use strategy is the Northern Tasmania Regional Strategy (regional strategy).
2. In the initial draft amendment, the applicant and the planning authority both submitted that proposal was consistent with the regional strategy as it provides a logical expansion of a residential area within an established Urban Growth Corridor. The planning authority also submitted that the subject site is best considered as a form of rural living development in that it is too small for agriculture and therefore an alternative use is reasonable.

1. The Commission refers to its earlier decision dated 17 October 2025 on the initial draft amendment, in which it determined that based on evidence provided, on balance, the initial draft amendment was not, as far as practicable, consistent with the regional strategy. The Commission did not accept the subject site is within a growth corridor and nor did the regional strategy provide adequate justification for it to be wholly rezoned from Agriculture Zone to the Low Density Residential Zone, with specific reference to consistency with strategies D2.2 and D2.2.2.
2. In relation to the substitute draft amendment, the Commission finds the proposed Rural Living Zone A with the three SSQs and removal of the SAP from part of the site will facilitate a planning outcome on the subject site that is as far as practicable, consistent with the regional strategy, including strategy D2.2.
3. The substitute draft amendment will enable only one additional dwelling on the subject site, and it must be generously setback from adjoining land. This is generally consistent with the regional strategy, recognises the importance of agricultural land, will prevent inappropriate fragmentation of rural land, and protect farming operations from conflict with rural living residents.
4. The Commission finds no additional evidence or information submitted for the substitute draft amendment raises any new matters that would justify altering its position.
5. The Commission remains satisfied that the substitute draft amendment is, as far as practicable, consistent with the regional strategy.

1. The relevant State Policies are the State Policy on the Protection of Agricultural Land 2009 (PAL Policy), the State Policy on Water Quality Management 1997 and the National Environment and Protection Measures (NEPMs).
2. In the initial draft amendment, the Planning Authority concluded that conversion of the site to allow residential use and development is consistent with the relevant principles of the PAL Policy. In this assessment, expert evidence was submitted by the applicant and the planning authority which concluded that viable agricultural use on the subject site was highly unlikely given the constraints and the impact from existing surrounding agricultural uses to any proposed residential use on the land was considered low. Further, the site was of insufficient scale to support an agricultural use, other than for a 'hobby' activity.
3. The Commission broadly accepted the agricultural reports prepared and that in pursuing the draft amendment, the land would likely no longer be available for agricultural uses. However, the Commission also noted in its earlier decision, that lot size is not a consideration under the PAL Policy, and it was not uncommon in the area for multiple lots to be farmed as a single agricultural enterprise. The Commission also noted that it was self-evident by existing adjoining and nearby uses that the land (including the soil and access to water) is suitable for productive agricultural uses.
4. In relation to all other State Policies and NEPMs, the Commission resolved that the draft amendment was generally consistent with those policies and was not inconsistent with requirements for NEPMs.

1. The Commission refers to its earlier decision dated 17 October 2025 on the initial draft amendment, in which it determined that based on the evidence presented the draft amendment was consistent with all State Policies and not inconsistent with the NEPMs.
2. The insertion of an SSQ requiring generous setback from adjoining land, recognises the importance of agricultural land, supports it being used for productive agricultural uses, and ensures farming operations are protected from conflict with 'rural living' residents.
3. The Commission finds no additional evidence or information submitted for the substitute draft amendment, raises any new matters that would justify altering its position in relation to the State Polices or NEPMs.
4. The Commission remains satisfied that the substitute draft amendment is consistent with the State Policies and NEPMs.

1. The Commission refers to its earlier decision dated 17 October 2025 on the initial draft amendment, in which it determined that based on evidence provided, that the draft amendment did not further the Schedule 1 Objectives of the Act.
2. In its decision the Commission determined the inclusion of the modifications in a draft amendment (that is, the substitute draft amendment) will further the Objectives of the Act.

1. The Commission finds no additional evidence or information submitted for the substitute draft amendment, raises any new matters that would justify altering its position.
2. In relation to the substitute draft amendment, the Commission finds that applying the Rural Living Zone A together with the three proposed SSQs - and removing the SAP from part of the site - will facilitate a planning outcome that furthers the Objectives of the Act.
3. The Commission remains satisfied that the suite of controls contained in the substitute draft amendment will:
   • provide appropriate protections for adjoining agricultural uses by managing potential land‑use conflict
   • establish a lot density that is suitable in the context of the existing lot pattern, surrounding residential land uses and development, and the established character of the area, and
   • appropriately address the identified infrastructure requirements and environmental constraints, including landslip and bushfire risk.

1. The Commission is satisfied that the substitute draft amendment meets the LPS criteria and gives its approval.

Annexure A - Approved amendment AMD03-24 - substitute draft amendment

Approved amendment AMD03-24 - substitute draft amendment

1. Apply the Rural Living Zone A to the whole title at 11 Upper McEwans Road, Legana folio of the Register 174606/1 as shown below:

1. Remove the WTA-S3.0 Residential Supply and Density Specific Area Plan from a portion of the land at 11 Upper McEwans Road, Legana, as shown below:

1. Amend the planning scheme ordinance to insert site specific qualifications WTA-11.2, WTA 11.3 and WTA 11.4 as follows:

Description (modification, substitution or addition)

Buildings for a sensitive use must be separated from an Agriculture Zone or Rural Zone a minimum distance of:

• 30m from a southern boundary where it adjoins an Agriculture Zone, and
• 80m from a western boundary where it adjoins an Agriculture Zone.

Rural Living Zone - clause 11.4.2 A4 Building height, setback and siting

Rural Living Zone A at 11 Upper McEwans Road, Legana - 0.6ha.

Each lot, or lot proposed on a plan of subdivision, excluding for public open space, a riparian or littoral reserve or Utilities, must be capable of connecting to a public stormwater system and must not result in a net increase of stormwater flows to properties to the north of Upper McEwans Road.

1. Amend the planning scheme maps to insert a site specific qualification overlay with annotation WTA-11.2, WTA-11.3 and WTA-11.4 on folio of the Register 174506/1 as shown below: