DECISION

Local Provisions Schedule West Coast

Date of decision 23 March 2021

Under section 35K(1)(a) of Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act), the Commission directs the planning authority to modify the draft LPS in accordance with the notice at Attachment 2. When the directed modifications have been undertaken under section 35K(2), the Commission is satisfied that the LPS meets the LPS criteria and is in order for approval under section 35L(1).

Ann Cunningham Dianne Cowen Delegate (Chair) Delegate

West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

The West Coast Planning Authority (the planning authority) exhibited the West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule (the draft LPS), under section 35D of Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 (the Act), from 17 August 2020 to 15 October 2020.

On 21 December 2020, the planning authority provided the Commission with a report under section 35F(1) into 11 representations received on the draft LPS. A list of representations is at Attachment 1.

Date and place of hearing The Commission must hold a hearing in relation to representations to the draft LPS under section 35H of the Act. A hearing was held at the Commission’s office on Level 3, 144 Macquarie Street, Hobart on 15 February 2021.

Consideration of the draft LPS

1. Under section 35J(1) of the Act the Commission must consider: • the planning authority section 35F(1) report and the draft LPS to which it relates; • the information obtained at the hearings; • whether it is satisfied that the draft LPS meets the Local Provision Schedule (LPS) criteria under section 34; and • whether modifications ought to be made to the draft LPS. 2. Under section 35J(2) of the Act, the Commission may also consider whether there are any matters that relate to issues of a technical nature or may be relevant to the implementation of the LPS if the LPS were approved. 3. The LPS criteria to be met by the draft LPS are: (a) contains all the provisions that the State Planning Provisions (SPPs) specify must be contained in an LPS; (b) is in accordance with section 32 of the Act; (c) furthers the objectives set out in Schedule 1 of the Act; (d) is consistent with each State policy; (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; (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; (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

2 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

(h) has regard to the safety requirements set out in the standards prescribed under the Gas Pipelines Act 2000. 4. The relevant regional land use strategy is the Cradle Coast Regional Land Use Planning Framework 2010 - 2030 (the regional strategy), declared in October 2011. 5. In addition to the LPS criteria, the Commission has considered Guideline No. 1 – Local Provisions Schedule (LPS): zone and code application (Guideline No. 1) issued under section 8A of the Act. 6. The requirements for making modifications to the draft LPS are set out under section 35K of the Act. The modifications can be broadly categorised as modifications section 35K(1)(a). 7. The Commission may also reject the draft LPS and request that the planning authority prepare a substitute [section 35K(c)(i)]. 8. Where the Commission has determined modifications ought be made, these are set out in a notice under 35K(1)(a) of the Act (see Attachment 2).

Issues raised in the representations

General Residential Zone – 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street, Tullah

Representations: Tullah Progress Association Inc. (3) and Kim Lai, Jane Bennett, Aaron Chen, Greg Clark, Skyridge Pty Ltd (9) 9. The representors requested a revision to the proposed zoning for three properties in Tullah from the Rural Zone to the General Residential Zone. The reasons include that the land is fully serviced with reticulated water, sewer and stormwater, electricity, sealed roads and footpaths. Further reasons are that the range of uses provided for by the Use Table in the Rural Zone is inappropriate for land on the periphery of a residential area, and that application of the General Residential Zone would be consistent with the West Coast Council Land Use Planning Strategy 2017. 10. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded with the following points: • confirmation that the land is fully serviced; • that application of the General Residential Zone is not consistent with GRZ 2 (c) of Guideline No. 1 - Local Provisions Schedule (LPS): zone and code application (Guideline No. 1) as application of the Zone is not supported by the regional strategy or any detailed local strategic analysis; • that the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy September 2017, concludes that there is already sufficient land in Tullah zoned General Residential; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act. 11. Prior to the hearing, one of the representors, Mr Kim Lai, submitted reports from three real estate agents contending that there is strong market demand for residential land at Tullah. Additionally, the representor submitted data from theLIST showing that 102 properties have been sold in Tullah since 2013, increasing from an average of 7 sales per year across 2013 and 2014 to an average of 18.5 sales per year across 2018 and 2019.

3 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

12. At the hearing, the planning authority reiterated its opinion that application of the General Residential Zone is not supported by the regional strategy, in particular policy 4.3.1 - urban settlement areas. Its view, which was also expressed in a submission following the hearing, is that Tullah has a significant supply of residential land, being a minimum of 15 years calculated on the basis of historic development rates. The West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017 identifies a 28 year supply for the whole planning area as of 2017, based on the available uptake of vacant lots at that time and the average annual uptake of 4 across the planning area. The planning authority noted that its records indicate that only a small number of dwellings were constructed in Tullah between 2000 and 2014, which equates to a take up rate of 1.75 lots per year. 13. The planning authority and the representors also debated whether the land was green-field, brown-field or grey-field for the purposes of application of GRZ 2 (c) of Guideline No. 1. The view of the planning authority, confirmed in a submission following the hearing, is that the land is grey-field. The representor’s party to representation 9 and represented by Mr Lai, agreed but also held the view that the land is ‘non-urban.’ 14. The representors disagreed with the method the planning authority used to calculate the supply of land within the General Residential Zone. The representors pointed to real estate sales data as evidence that demand is increasing and that supply must therefore be increased. The representors went further to assert this indicates that the regional strategy and the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017 both misrepresent the actual demand for residential land in Tullah, which is evident in the real estate market. The representors were of the opinion that property sales would be higher in Tullah if not for the lack of available property itself. 15. The representors noted that there are several General Residential-zoned properties in Tullah that are not used for residential purposes, most notably 37 Farrell Street folio of the Register 100219/214 and 56 Farrell Street folio of the Register 100219/213, which are both used for Visitor Accommodation purposes. The representors contended that these properties should be removed from the calculation of land supply, or that the zoning of such land could be changed to an alternative that provided specifically for that use. The equivalent quantity of General Residential Zone could then be applied to 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street. 16. In a submission made following the hearing, the planning authority advised that it would not oppose the idea of extending General Residential zoning within the settlement and therefore applying the Zone to 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street, but not at the expense of removal of the Zone from 37 and 56 Farrell Street. The prevailing view of the planning authority is that further strategic work would be required to determine that the rezoning of 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street to General Residential would be supported by the regional strategy. 17. In response, the representors remained in disagreement about the methodology used by the planning authority to calculate the supply and demand for residential land in Tullah, particularly calculation of potential lot yield within the General Residential Zone. Mr Lai contended that constraints such as location of existing buildings, existing uses, and lifestyle choices would diminish the ultimate subdivision potential of land in Tullah. 18. Two of the representors, Mr Lai and Mr Steve de Villiers, owner of 37 and 56 Farrell Street, were supportive of zoning 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street General Residential and applying the Village Zone to 37 and 56 Farrell Street. Both noted the potential for 37 and 56 Farrell Street to be used for a distillery, which is currently prohibited in the General Residential Zone.

4 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

19. Mr Lai noted in his submission that page 6 of the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017, states that the strategic plan should be read in conjunction with the following documentation, which was not available to the representors: • Consultation Strategy (May 2017) prepared by Integrated Planning Solutions; • The SWOT Analysis (June 2017) prepared by Integrated Planning Solutions, Essential Economics and Ratio Traffic consultants; and • Economics Assessment Report (July 2017) prepared by Essential Economics. 20. At the hearing, the parties also discussed the most appropriate zoning for 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street and 2 Romulus Street in the event that the General Residential Zone was not applied. The representors raised concern that application of the Rural Zone is not consistent with the Zone Purpose clause 20.1.3, and RZ 1 of Guideline No. 1 on the basis that the land is urban and the range of uses provided for in the Zone are not appropriate for that land. In response, the planning authority acknowledged that there are uses provided for by the Rural Zone that would not necessarily be appropriate, but that the land may not be used for that purpose. It applied the Rural Zone because that is what the land is zoned under the West Coast Interim Planning Scheme 2013 (the Interim Scheme) and there is no better alternative zone to apply in the circumstances. The planning authority also stated that application of the Future Urban Zone could be an option, however further strategic work would need to be done before it was satisfied that the Zone would be consistent with the regional strategy and FUZ 1 of Guideline No. 1.

Commission consideration 21. The Commission notes the evidence provided by the parties, however is not persuaded that there is sufficient demand for residential land in Tullah to warrant application of the General Residential Zone to 4 Selina Street, 4 Sterling Street, and 2 Romulus Street. The regional strategy, identifies Tullah as facing a low growth scenario under which demand is driven by internal population change and low rates of inward migration. The settlement strategy specified in the regional strategy is therefore for stable growth and development within the established boundaries of the nominated settlement area without priority for intensification. Policy 4.9 (land for housing – places to live) specifies a practical need to retain a minimum 10- year outward supply for each settlement. The Commission considers the calculations of current subdivision potential in Tullah made by the planning authority is somewhat optimistic, however agrees with the view of the planning authority that there is a current supply of residential land in Tullah of somewhere between 15 and 28 years based on historic dwelling approval trends. 22. The Commission is not satisfied that the representors have provided sufficient concrete data to demonstrate that application of the General Residential Zone should be applied in contrast to the regional strategy and the West Coast Land Use Strategy 2017. While the analysis provided by the representors is predominantly limited to anecdotal evidence and real estate data, more comprehensive information is required to establish whether projected demand is consistent with the current and projected supply. An analysis should also include relevant census data, including analysis of population trends, building approvals, economic and business trends and analysis of the subdivision/dwelling yield potential of vacant land, taking into account constraints such as location of existing buildings, existing uses, lifestyle choices, subdivision costs and market values. The West Coast Land Use Strategy 2017 is currently the document that provides relevant detail about these matters and therefore, in lieu of any robust and contrary data, its conclusion that sufficient land is currently provided in the General Residential Zone at Tullah is accepted. Similarly, the regional strategy, which must be considered under section 34(2) of the Act, indicates that the current amount of General Residential-zoned land is sufficient. Despite being written in 2010 and now based on

5 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

somewhat outdated information, there is no evidence to suggest that the proposed General Residential Zone is inconsistent with it. 23. The Commission notes that the documents identified by Mr Kim Lai that were intended to be ‘read in conjunction’ with the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy, do not form part of the strategy itself, and have notably not been endorsed by the planning Authority. 24. The Commission is not satisfied that removal of the General Residential Zone from 37 and 56 Farrell Street is appropriate. The Purpose of the Zone specifically provides for Visitor Accommodation that is compatible with residential uses and parts of the land not currently used for that purpose are suitable for residential use and development. The Zone also provides for the current use to be replaced with residential use in future. Furthermore, it is not evident what alternative zone would apply to the land given the land is serviced without further strategic assessment. Application of the General Residential Zone satisfies Guideline No. 1 and the regional strategy policy 4.11, which promotes a contained settlement centre, where the objective is to create a compact settlement pattern. 25. The Commission considers that application of the General Residential Zone would not meet relevant regional land use policies to be as far as practicable consistent with the regional land use strategy. On that basis it cannot satisfy GRZ 2 (c) of Guideline No. 1. The Commission agrees with the planning authority and the representors that the land is grey-field but nevertheless notes that such classification does not affect the manner in which GRZ 2 is applied. 26. The Commission accepts the view of the planning authority that further strategic work is required to establish whether an alternative zone such as General Residential or Future Urban, should be applied to the land in the future. Application of the Rural Zone is appropriate in the circumstances given the absence of any suitable alternative zones.

Commission decision 27. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Local Business Zone – 20, 21, 22, 27 and 31 Peters Street, 1, 2, 36, 37, 40 and 56 Farrell Street, Tullah

Representations: Tullah Progress Association Inc. (3) and Kim Lai, Jane Bennett, Aaron Chen, Greg Clark, Skyridge Pty Ltd (9), Steve de Villiers (11) 28. The representors requested application of the Local Business Zone to 10 properties at Tullah in place of the General Residential Zone and believe that the Local Business Zone proposed for the town centre should be expanded to include other properties containing existing businesses. The reasons put forward assert that the Local Business Zone more appropriately recognises the existing uses and would provide greater certainty on proposed future use and development opportunities. 29. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded that the General Residential Zone and non-conforming use rights would provide opportunity for continuation of existing business uses, expansion, and some establishment. Application of the Local Business Zone was not supported for the following reasons: • the relevant properties adjoin existing residential use or development, or vacant residential land;

6 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

• the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017 recommends further investigations into use and development of land at Tullah, including whether land abutting the Murchison Highway between Ardyn Street and Elliot Street may be suited to a mixed use or business zone, however, that work has not been undertaken and therefore cannot support a zoning change at this time; • the planning authority recognises the need for local strategic land use planning to determine whether alternative zones are warranted which will occur separately to the draft LPS process; • application of the Local Business Zone would not result in a zoning pattern with sound strategic rationale; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act. 30. Prior to the hearing, the planning authority advised that the former petrol station at 20 and 22 Peters Street (folios of the register 238177/1 and 248552/6), which the representors propose should be zoned Local Business, has not been in operation for a period exceeding 2 years and therefore does not have non-conforming use rights. Furthermore, the petrol station does not have a current Environmental Protection Notice to permit its operation. 31. At the hearing, the representors contended that the Local Business Zone should apply more broadly to the centre of Tullah and extend to the Murchison Highway. This would provide for use and development that would attract passing tourist traffic into the centre of the town. The representors also stated that they do not want the private car park at 12 Farrell Street, adjacent to the community hall, to be confused as a Council car park. 32. In response, the planning authority stated that application of the Local Business Zone in addition to that already proposed, would be too extensive as the regional strategy identifies Tullah as requiring controls that provide for stable growth and development within the established boundaries of the nominated settlement area. The position of the planning authority is that expansion of the Local Business Zone would be contrary to this policy, as the Local Business Zone provides for uses that may not be suitable for a broader residential area and would disrupt the current pattern of the settlement and have residential amenity implications. The planning authority reiterated its view that the extent of the Local Business Zone is also consistent with Guideline No. 1 and the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017. t specifically noted that application of the Local Business Zone to the land alongside the Murchison Highway at 2 Farrell Street would be inappropriate as the land has value as a buffer and contains natural values. The planning authority also stated that it intends to review how it has applied the Local Business Zone outside of the LPS process. 33. The parties also discussed the merits of applying the Village Zone (fully or partially) to the land currently proposed to be zoned General Residential alongside the Murchison Highway on the northern side of Tullah (i.e. that land north of folio of the Register 212236/14). 34. In submissions made following the hearing, the planning authority did not express a firm view in support of the Village Zone, while representors, Mr Lai, Mr de Villiers and Ms Jenny Bowie representing the Tullah Progress Association were supportive. The reasons were that the Village Zone would provide more business opportunities.

7 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 35. The Commission accepts the view of the planning authority that the provisions of the General Residential Zone and existing non-conforming use rights would provide a degree of certainty for existing and proposed uses identified in the representations. Application of an alternative zone to the former petrol station site would not be appropriate as the petrol station has no existing non-confirming use rights and does not have a current Environmental Protection Notice to permit its operation. 36. The view of the Commission is that further expansion of the Local Business Zone, or application of the Village Zone to a small and contained settlement outside of a clearly identified centre, and existing uses that are generally well-segregated, would not be consistent with regional strategy policy 4.11 - Strategic Outcomes for Liveable and Sustainable Communities. Likewise, the Commission agrees with the planning authority that the Local Business Zone should not be applied simply to recognise the use of the land or simply to provide opportunity for commercial development without demonstrated strategic rationale. As noted by the planning authority, doing so would not be consistent with good planning principles, in this case spreading the commercial centre of the settlement and potentially undermining its settlement pattern. Furthermore, application of these zones without proper strategic planning analysis could cause unintended land use conflicts, including problems for residential amenity at the interface between residential and commercial use. Economic implications such as the impact the zoning could have on the market value of properties, have not been detailed in any supporting strategic work. 37. The Commission notes that the planning authority may undertake further local strategic land use planning work outside the draft LPS process to determine the spatial application of zones in Tullah and accepts there is insufficient strategic evidence to justify expansion or application of the Local Business or Village zones at this time. 38. The Commission considers that the issues raised by the representor in relation to the use of the car park at 2 Farrell Street are not relevant to the zoning of the land.

Commission decision 39. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Light Industrial Zone – 28 Hean Street, Tullah

Representation: Kim Lai, Jane Bennett, Aaron Chen, Greg Clark, Skyridge Pty Ltd (9) 40. The representor would support application of the Light Industrial Zone to land at 28 Hean Street, Tullah folio of the Register 201624/1. The representor noted that the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017 concludes that the ‘potential for a local service industrial precinct to be located south of Hean Street and adjacent to the existing industrial use should be considered.’ 41. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded with the following points: • that further investigations are necessary to demonstrate that a rezoning to support an alternative zone is warranted; • the planning authority recognises the need for local strategic land use planning to determine whether a Light Industrial Zone is warranted, which will occur separately to the draft LPS process; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act.

8 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

42. At the hearing, the representor stated their view that the land is ready for industrial use and development and there is existing interest to use the land for Manufacturing and Processing. In response, the planning authority stated more strategic work is required to determine whether Light Industrial zoned land is needed in Tullah and where such land should be located. While the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017 identifies that a Light Industrial Zone may be appropriate, application of the zone is not explicitly supported by the Guideline No. 1, the regional strategy, or the North West Tasmania Industrial Land Study. The planning authority noted that the Rural Zone proposed for the land provides for Manufacturing and Processing as a Discretionary Use.

Commission consideration 43. The Commission accepts the view of the planning authority that further local strategic land use planning outside the draft LPS assessment process is required to determine whether alternative zones are warranted and accepts there is insufficient strategic evidence to justify application of the Light Industrial Zone at this point in time.

Commission decision 44. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Environmental Management Zone - Various Areas - Permanent Timber Production Zone Land and Future Potential Production Forest Land

Representation: Bob Brown Foundation (6) 45. The representor contends that Permanent Timber Production Zone land and Future Potential Production Forest land is located in the planning area that contains values and attributes to warrant application of the Environmental Management Zone or Landscape Conservation Zone under Guideline No. 1. Specifically, the representor requested application of the Environmental Management Zone to a number of properties designated as Permanent Timber Production Zone land or Future Potential Production Forest land, including the following: • Part of Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown PID 3387490; • Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown (4 land parcels under PIDs 3388207 and 3387490; • Henty Road, Strahan PID 3388629; • Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3387298; • Part of Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3389373; • Unidentified Crown land adjacent to the north-west boundary of Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3389373 and south of Henty River; • Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3387343; • Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown PID 3389330; • Zeehan Highway, Zeehan PID 2531681 (including 4 small unidentified land parcels within); • Lynchford Road, Queenstown PID 3387896 (2 parcels) and unidentified land between these two parcels owned by Hydro Tasmania; • Part of Henty Road, West Coast PID 3387394; • Part of Henty Road, West Coast PID 3387394; • Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3387992;

9 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

• Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3388012; • Heemskirk Road, Granville Harbour PID 3388290; • Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3388127; • Unidentified Crown land adjacent to Lake Pieman south of Pieman Road, West Coast PID 2531913; and • Pieman Road, West Coast PID 2531948. 46. The reasons include that the land is identified in the Independent Verification Group report on the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement, March 2017 as having outstanding natural values. The representor noted that the Forestry (Rebuilding the Forest Industry) Act 2014 states Future Potential Production Forest Land cannot be harvested (except for some minor special species harvesting) without prior parliamentary approval to change the status of the land from Future Potential Production Forest to Permanent Timber Production Zone. The representor’s view is that as Future Potential Production Forest, the land is in effect managed for its natural values and that the zoning (Environmental Management Zone or Landscape Conservation Zone) should be applied for this purpose. Only in the event that the land is changed to Permanent Timber Production Zone by parliamentary approval, should alternative zones be considered. 47. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded with the following points: • application of the Rural Zone is compliant with RZ1 of Guideline No.1; • application of the Environmental Management Zone is not compliant with Guideline No.1 as the land is not primarily managed for protection of natural values; • further strategic assessment would be required to support a change to the Environmental Management Zone; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act. 48. At the hearing, the representor, represented by Mr Scott Jordan, reiterated its view that the Future Potential Production Forest land identified in its representation contains significant natural values and therefore application of the Rural Zone does not comply with Guideline No. 1. The representor’s view was that the Environmental Management Zone would comply with EMZ 1(e) of Guideline No. 1, as the land is public and the primary purpose of its management is for the protection and conservation of natural values. Mr Jordan stated that the provisions of the Environmental Management Zone are consistent with the values and practices for management of the land adopted by Sustainable Timber Tasmania. Mr Jordan’s view was that the Rural Zone is unsuitable because the range of uses provided for under the SPPs are not consistent with the management of the natural values of the land. 49. The planning authority had no concerns with the range of uses provided in the Rural Zone.

10 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 50. The Commission has previously sought a submission from the Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE), as the Department responsible for administering Future Potential Production Forest land. In its submission, DPIPWE supported application of the Rural Zone to Future Potential Production Forest land. DPIPWE noted the approach is in keeping with Government policy objectives for management of Future Potential Production Forest land to secure a ‘wood bank’ to provide for future sustainable forestry. The only exception to this advice was its recommendation that the Environmental Management Zone be applied to the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Heritage Landscape, which was supported by the parties at the hearing. 51. The Commission notes: • the Forestry (Rebuilding the Forest Industry) Act 2014, provides for special species timber harvesting in Future Potential Production Forest land that, under clause 4.4.1 of the SPPs is largely exempt where in conformity with a forest practices plan; and • the management objectives for Future Potential Production Forest land, under Schedule 3 of the Forestry (Rebuilding the Forest Industry) Act 2014, are broad ranging and include to: conserve natural biological diversity, geological diversity, water quality, and the like; encourage education, research, tourism, recreational use, and the like; provide for activities such as the taking of game species, the controlled use of natural resources, exploration activities and taking of mineral resources; and allow for private, commercial or industrial uses. 52. The Commission considers that many of the uses provided for by the Rural Zone are similar to the Environmental Management and Landscape Conservation zones. It is important to note that if the land is included in the Rural Zone, the Natural Assets Code applies and biodiversity values will be protected by way of the standards in the Code. For example, if a Tourist Operation or Visitor Accommodation is proposed this will be a Discretionary use in the Rural, Environmental Management and Landscape Conservation zones and the Code will also apply. 53. Irrespective of which zone is applied, forestry activities are exempt from the Natural Assets Code, and would be regulated by way of a Forest Practices Plan approved under the Forest Practices Act 1985. The intention of the SPPs is not to control use where other external approvals are required. 54. The Commission prefers the advice of DPIPWE.

Commission decision 55. Modification: • Revise the zoning of that part of Heemskirk Road, Granville Harbour PID 3388557 that is within the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape to Environmental Management.

Utilities Zone - Water Infrastructure

Representation: TasWater (1) 56. The representor requested that the zoning of three parcels of land containing two water reservoir tanks at Robinson Street, Zeehan PID 3279158 be revised from the Rural Zone to the Utilities Zone. 57. In the section 35F report the planning authority recommended that the properties be revised to the Utilities Zone consistent with UZ 4 of Guideline No. 1.

11 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 58. The Commission considers that the primary objective in applying zones should be to achieve the zone purpose to the greatest possible extent. As such, the Commission considers that land containing water storage infrastructure should be zoned Utilities consistent with Guideline No. 1.

Commission decision 59. Modification: • Revise the zoning of Robinson Street, Zeehan, PID 3279158 (3 land parcels) to Utilities. 60. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1.

Utilities Zone – Rail Infrastructure

Representations: TasRail (5) 61. The representor requested that the zoning of the Melba Flats Siding, Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3215509 be revised from the Rural Zone to the Utilities Zone. The reason is that the land forms part of the State rail network; the siding being defined as rail infrastructure under the Rail Infrastructure Act 2007. 62. In the section 35F report the planning authority recommended that the Utilities Zone be applied to the land consistent with UZ 1 (f) of Guideline No. 1 on the basis that the siding forms part of the rail network as defined under the Rail Infrastructure Act 2007.

Commission consideration 63. The Commission agrees that the Melba Flats Siding forms part of the State rail network and should be zoned Utilities as a result.

Commission decision 64. Modification: • Revise the zoning of the Melba Flats Siding, Murchison Highway, West Coast, PID 3215509 (2 land parcels) to Utilities. 65. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1.

Utilities Zone – State Roads

Representations: Department of State Growth (7) 66. The representor supports the application of the Utilities Zone to State Roads and is satisfied that its application is consistent with the State Road Casement layer on theLIST and therefore UZ 2 of Guideline No. 1. The representor is also supportive of application of the Utilities Zone to Anthony Road. 67. In the section 35F report, the planning authority noted the representor’s comments proposed no change to the proposed zoning. The planning authority also stated that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS, and that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act.

12 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 68. The Commission notes the representor’s comments and agrees with the view of the planning authority that the draft LPS does not require modification.

Commission decision 69. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Utilities Zone - Electricity Infrastructure

Representation: Hydro Tasmania (8), TasNetworks (10) 70. The representors requested that the zoning of a number of electricity generation facilities, including power stations, dams, major substation facilities, and communication facilities be revised to the Utilities Zone. 71. The representations included maps of the proposed extent of the Utilities Zone and in the case of communication facilities, suggested a 20m buffer distance around each facility. 72. The reasons included that the examples of electricity generation, transmission and associated infrastructure constitute major utilities and application of the Utilities Zone is consistent with UZ 1 and UZ 4 of Guideline No. 1. 73. In the section 35F report, the planning authority recommended that the Utilities Zone be applied to the land consistent with UZ 1 of Guideline No. 1.

Commission consideration 74. The Commission considers that the electricity generation, transmission and associated infrastructure detailed in the representations is used and intended to be used for major utilities infrastructure, consistent with UZ 1 of Guideline No. 1.

Commission decision 75. Modification: • Revise the zoning of the following sites to the Utilities Zone, consistent with the boundaries shown in Attachment A of the Hydro Tasmania representation dated 16 October 2020: - John Butters Power Station; - Crotty Dam; - Darwin Dam; - Margaret Dam; - Upper Lake Margaret Power Station; - Lower Lake Margaret Power Station; - Reece Dam and Power Station; - Bastyan Dam and Power Station; - Mackintosh Dam, Mackintosh Power Station, and Tullibardine Dam; - Murchison Dam; - Tribute Power Station; - Anthony Dam and Levee;

13 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

- Newton Dam and Pumps; - Henty Dam; - White Spur Dam; and - Dam on Hall Rivulet Canal. • Revise the zoning of the following switching station and communication sites to the Utilities Zone: - Mt Read Communication Site PID 2531630; and - Pieman Switching Station, with the split zone defined by direct lines between the following coordinates: - E344002.32 N5379514.65; - E344005.32 N5379630.25; - E344173.52 N5379630.25; and - E344173.52 N5379514.65. • Apply the Utilities Zone to a 20m radius circle around the following communications sites: - Mt Kershaw Passive Reflector Communication Site located at E378322.71 N5380551.83; - Pieman Dam Repeater Communication Site located at E344471.00 N5379115.85; and - John Butters Repeater Communication Site located at E378790.78 N5333206.53. 76. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1.

Zoning of the West Coast Wilderness Railway, Queenstown

Representations: West Coast Wilderness Railway (4), Department of State Growth (7) 77. Both representors request the application of the Utilities Zone to the West Coast Wilderness Railway at either end of the railway line at Queenstown and Strahan. The representors contend that application of the General Residential Zone at Queenstown is not consistent with the existing use or the likely future use and development of the land, particularly the workshops at Driffield Street, Queenstown PID 3010693. The West Coast Wilderness Railway representation requests the application of the Local Business Zone or the Light Industrial Zone to the workshops. The reasons include that the provisions of the General Residential Zone could interfere with existing operations, and that the Local Business or Light Industrial zones would be more appropriate and provide for the use. The representation made by the Department of State Growth is supportive of the application of the Utilities Zone to that section of the rail line between Strahan and Queenstown. 78. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded with the following points: • the application of the Utilities Zone to the line as it enters Queenstown and Strahan (the line is absorbed by the prevailing General Residential, Local Business, General Business, Rural and Environmental Management zones in these locations) was not deemed to be consistent with UZ 1 and UZ 6 of Guideline No. 1 or the Zone Purpose as the line is used for tourism and not for a genuine utility;

14 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

• the Utilities Zone would limit use and development possibilities for the West Coast Wilderness Railway as it is considered a Tourist Operation use under the SPPs; • application of the General Residential Zone to the workshops is the same as in the Interim Planning Scheme and the site currently operates under existing non-conforming use rights, which would continue to apply under the LPS while the activity operates; • the application of the Light Industrial Zone to the workshops is not appropriate without further investigation, given the proximity of established residential uses and potential for off-site impacts; • the application of the Local Business Zone to the workshops is also not suitable as it is not consistent with Guideline No. 1 or the zone purpose; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act. 79. At the hearing, the representors questioned why the rail line and stations at Queenstown and Strahan, as well as the fuel depot at 123 Esplanade, Strahan could not be zoned Utilities and why the workshops at Driffield Street, Queenstown PID 3010693 could not be zoned Local Business, Light Industrial or Utilities. In response, the planning authority highlighted the economic importance of the tourist railway to the municipality and reiterated its view that the Utilities Zone is limited to very few use classes, which may not provide a suitable range of uses to support the tourist railway. Application of the Utilities Zone to a tourist railway is not consistent with UZ 1 of Guideline No. 1 and the intent of the line as a tourist railway is not consistent with the Zone Purpose. While the planning authority is of the opinion the Utilities Zone is appropriate for the railway line between the towns on the basis that there are no suitable alternatives, its view was that a combination of the General Business, Local Business and General Residential zones are more favourable to the West Coast Wilderness Railway because the combination of allowable uses it offers would better support the Railway. 80. The planning authority also noted difficulty in classifying the uses that are ancillary to the railway, such as land used for fuel storage, the workshops, and the café at Queenstown, which had also affected the choice of zones. It expressed the view that the Railway and all its components should be classified as Tourist Operation. 81. The Department of State Growth agreed that if classified as Tourist Operation, then application of the Local Business and General Business zones as proposed would be best suited. However, if classified as Transport Depot and Distribution, then the use would be prohibited in the General Residential Zone where applied to the Driffield Street workshops and within the Local Business Zone and the General Business Zone, rendering the use non- conforming. The preferred view of the Department was that the Utilities Zone should apply to all land used by the Railway. 82. The West Coast Wilderness Railway represented by its General Manager Mr Anthony Brown, highlighted particular concern with application of the General Residential Zone to the workshops as it would not provide opportunity for any significant expansion of the existing operations. Mr Brown indicated that the West Coast Wilderness Railway has ideas for development of the site, including construction of a new building to house a locomotive and was concerned that the use standards of the General Residential Zone would be prohibitive due to the potential amenity impacts from the use. Both Mr Brown and the planning authority were in agreement that there has been no history of complaints from the adjoining residents about the operations at the site.

15 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

83. Mr Brown also outlined plans for a minor development planned to expand the café at Queenstown Railway Station and a desire to develop a helipad at the Queenstown workshops. This would enable tourists to travel to the middle of the line (Lynchford) by train and then be flown back to Queenstown by helicopter, replicating the current operation from Lynchford to Strahan. The representor’s view is that the Light Industrial Zone would be most appropriate for the workshops expansion and helipad. 84. Following the hearing, the planning authority made a submission expressing its view that the correct use class for the railway is Tourist Operation. Subservient uses such as the café, would be classified as part of that use under clause 6.2.2 of the SPPs or classified as a separate use provided for by the proposed zones, such as General Business. The view of the planning authority was that the workshops would most likely be classified as Transport Depot and Distribution. Consequently, the planning authority recommended that the workshop site be zoned Utilities, which provides for Transport Depot and Distribution as a Permitted Use. 85. The planning authority also stated that a site-specific qualification could be applied to the land to provide for the use of Transport Depot and Distribution or specifically for the development proposed by the West Coast Wilderness Railway.

Commission consideration 86. The Commission acknowledges the difficulty in identifying an appropriate zone for the tourist railway given its composition of several uses. The Commissions finding is that the railway and all of its subservient components, including the workshops at Driffield Street, Queenstown should be classified as Tourist Operation. Based on the evidence presented by the parties at the hearing and information otherwise available, the workshop currently exists to support the tourist railway and is therefore subservient. 87. The Railway is not part of the rail network defined under the Rail Infrastructure Act 2007 and therefore application of the Utilities Zone to the whole line is not consistent with Guideline No. 1. Application of the Utilities Zone to the section of the line between Strahan and Queenstown is appropriate because it is the most uncomplicated way of recognising the line in the absence of a suitable alternative zone in areas that are otherwise zoned Rural and Environmental Management. That zoning is supported by the representors. 88. The Commission agrees with the view expressed by the planning authority in its section 35F report that the absorption of the line, stations, fuel depot and café within the prevailing zones at Queenstown and Strahan would best deliver suitable planning provisions for management of the Railway. The provisions of these zones, particularly the standards of the Local Business and General Business zones, would best manage potential land use conflicts with surrounding dwellings. These zones provide for Tourist Operation as a Discretionary use, which would be appropriately subject to use standards for hours of operation, external lighting, residential amenity, and protect against distortion of the retail hierarchy. 89. The Utilities Zone is problematic because it would not provide amenity or retail hierarchy standards and would subject the use to an inappropriate discretionary use standard as the Tourist Railway is well-established and is economically important to the area. The Light Industrial Zone is inappropriate because it would provide for uses that would conflict with the surrounding residences. The Commission acknowledges the difficulty in identifying an appropriate zone for the land and agrees with the original view of the planning authority that application of the Local Business, Utilities, or Light Industrial zones to the workshops would not be consistent with Guideline No. 1, or is otherwise not sufficiently supported by the regional strategy or the West Coast Council Land Use Strategy 2017. 90. The Commission notes the intention of the West Coast Wilderness Railway to develop the land to provide for its ongoing tourist operations and that the planning authority is prepared to investigate alternative planning controls for the land, including a site-specific qualification. 16 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

In the absence of any firm details about the proposed development, the Commission finds that the inclusion of a site-specific qualification is premature. The Commission notes that the site has existing non-conforming use rights that would allow the use to continue into the future. These rights will provide a degree of opportunity for changes to the existing use or development on the site consistent with clause 7.1 of the SPPs. On this basis, the Commission finds that application of the General Residential Zone is most appropriate in the circumstances.

Commission decision 91. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection Code - Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection Overlay - Electricity Infrastructure

Representation: TasNetworks (10) 92. The representor requested that the substation buffer facility overlay be applied consistent with the statewide Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection overlay guidance mapping. The representor also seeks to add the Pieman Switching Station, the Pieman Spur (Line 522), and the Pieman to Granville Spur (Line 534) to the Code overlay mapping. Additionally, the representor proposes to include all of the Rosebery substation at Arthur Street, Rosebery folio of the Register 169884/1 within the substation buffer facility overlay. 93. In the section 35F report, the planning authority recommended that the overlay mapping be applied consistent with the statewide Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection overlay guidance mapping and ETTIPC 1 of Guideline No. 1. The planning authority was supportive of application of substation buffer facility overlay to the whole of folio of the Register 169884/1.

Commission consideration 94. The Commission notes that the exhibited overlay is consistent with the statewide Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection overlay guidance mapping and does not require modification. The Commission agrees that the Pieman Switching Station, the Pieman Spur (Line 522), and the Pieman to Granville Spur (Line 534) warrant application of the Code overlays consistent with the mapping provided by the representor. The Commission also agrees that the substation buffer facility overlay should be applied to the whole of the Rosebery substation land title at Arthur Street, Rosebery folio of the Register 169884/1.

Commission decision 95. Modification: • Modify the Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection overlay by adding the Code overlays for the Pieman Switching Station, the Pieman Spur (Line 522), and the Pieman to Granville Spur (Line 534) consistent with the mapping provided by the TasNetworks in its submission dated 5 March 2021; and • Apply the Substation Facility Buffer Area overlay to the whole of the Rosebery substation at Arthur Street, Rosebery folio of the Register 169884/1. 96. Reason: To apply the electricity transmission infrastructure protection overlay consistent with the purpose of the Natural Assets Code and Guideline No. 1.

17 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Local Historic Heritage Code – Heritage Precinct Overlay

Representations: West Coast Wilderness Railway (4) 97. The representation requests that an overlay be applied to Orr Street, Queenstown to protect the heritage character of the buildings in the town’s main street. 98. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded with the following points: • the Main Streets Local Heritage Precinct would apply to Orr Street, which would provide for management of the heritage values of buildings fronting Orr Street; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and • that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act.

Commission consideration 99. The draft LPS includes two Local Heritage Precincts that are transitioning provisions. The Commission accepts the view of the planning authority that the Main Streets Local Heritage Precinct would provide the planning controls sought by the representor.

Commission decision 100. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Natural Assets Code - Priority Vegetation Area Overlay - Electricity Infrastructure

Representation: TasNetworks (10) 101. The representor requested that the Priority Vegetation Area overlay be removed from the Farrell Substation, the Newton Substation, the Mount Kershaw Passive Reflector Communication Site, the Reece Power Station Communication Site, and the Newton Pumping Station Communication Site (FR 163458/1). 102. The reason for requesting removal of the Priority Vegetation Area overlay is that the clearance of vegetation is required for the safety and maintenance of electricity infrastructure. 103. In the section 35F report, the planning authority recommended that the Priority Vegetation Area overlay be retained on the basis that there is no evidence that a circumstance relevant to clause LP1.7.5(d) (circumstances providing for modification of a Priority Vegetation Area) of the SPPs exists to support the modification of the Priority Vegetation Area overlay.

Commission consideration 104. The Commission is not persuaded that the Priority Vegetation Area overlay should be removed from the properties. The sites are not entirely covered by hard surfaces and there remains the possibility that priority vegetation could naturally re-establish. While the Electricity Supply Industry Act 1995 exemptions provide for clearance of vegetation independent of planning controls the primary objective in applying code overlays should be to achieve the code purpose irrespective of peripheral rights. Therefore, the Commission considers that the priority vegetation area overlay should continue to be applied to the land.

Commission decision 105. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

18 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Natural Assets Code - Priority Vegetation Area Overlay - Various Areas - Permanent Timber Production Zone Land and Future Potential Production Forest Land

Representation: Bob Brown Foundation (6) 106. The representor seeks application of the Priority Vegetation Area overlay to Permanent Timber Production Zone land and Future Potential Production Forest land identified in the Independent Verification Group report on the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement, March 2017 as having outstanding natural values. Specifically, the representor requested application of the overlay to a number of properties designated as Permanent Timber Production Zone Land or Future Potential Production Forest land, including the following: • Part of Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown PID 3387490; • Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown (4 land parcels under PIDs 3388207 and 3387490; • Henty Road, Strahan PID 3388629; • Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3387298; • Part of Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3389373; • Unidentified Crown land adjacent to the north-west boundary of Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3389373 and south of Henty River; • Henty Road, Strahan folio of the Register 137866/1 PID 3387343; • Mount Jukes Road, Queenstown PID 3389330; • Zeehan Highway, Zeehan PID 2531681 (including 4 small unidentified land parcels within); • Lynchford Road, Queenstown PID 3387896 (2 parcels) and unidentified land between these two parcels owned by Hydro Tasmania; • Part of Henty Road, West Coast PID 3387394; • Part of Henty Road, West Coast PID 3387394; • Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3387992; • Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3388012; • Heemskirk Road, Granville Harbour PID 3388290; • Murchison Highway, West Coast PID 3388127; • Unidentified Crown land adjacent to Lake Pieman south of Pieman Road, West Coast PID 2531913; and • Pieman Road, West Coast PID 2531948. 107. The reasons include that the Independent Verification Group report establishes that the land contains values and attributes that warrant application of the overlay under Guideline No. 1. 108. In the section 35F report, the planning authority responded that further strategic assessment would be required to support a change to the Priority Vegetation Area overlay. The planning authority also stated that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS, and that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act.

19 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 109. The Commission notes that the Priority Vegetation Area overlay has been applied consistent with the standardised Regional Ecosystem Model methodology developed by Natural Resources Management Pty Ltd for the preparation of the overlay and application under Guideline No. 1. 110. The Commission accepts the planning authority view that further local strategic land use planning outside the draft LPS assessment process would be required to determine whether more extensive application of the overlay, and therefore a departure from the standardised Regional Ecosystem Model, would be warranted. The Commission also accepts that there is insufficient strategic evidence to justify more extensive application of the overlay.

Commission decision 111. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Scenic Protection Code – Scenic Road Corridor Overlay - Various Areas - Permanent Timber Production Zone Land and Future Potential Production Forest Land

Representation: Bob Brown Foundation (6) 112. The representor seeks application of the Scenic Road Corridor overlay to the following roads and highways: • A10 – includes Lyell Highway from eastern municipal boundary to intersection with Zeehan Highway including Penghana Road, Zeehan Highway to intersection with Murchison Highway, Murchison Highway to northern municipal boundary; • B24 – Lyell Highway from intersection with Zeehan Highway to Harvey Street, Strahan, including Harvey Street to intersection with Andrew Street, and also including Harold Street; • B27 – Esplanade, Strahan, Bay Street, Innes Street West, Andrew Street to Henty Road, and Henty Road to Main Street, Zeehan, Main Street, Zeehan and Zeehan Highway to intersection with Murchison Highway; • B28 – Anthony Road; • C248 – Trial Harbour Road from intersection Heemskirk Road, Zeehan to Trial Harbour; • C249 – Main Street, Zeehan from intersection Henty Road to Heemskirk Road, Heemskirk Road to intersection Corinna Road, Corinna Road to northern municipal boundary; and • C252 – Heemskirk Road from intersection Corinna Road to Pieman Road, Pieman Road to intersection Murchison Highway. 113. The reasons are that the roads form tourist routes, or provide access to key tourist sites, and that application of the Scenic Road Corridor overlay would meet SPC 1, SPC 2 and SPC 3 of Guideline No. 1. 114. In the section 35F report the planning authority responded with the following points: • no overlay mapping for the Scenic Protection Code was produced due to limitations on resources needed to produce mapping; • the planning authority will consider undertaking a study to determine whether Scenic Protection Code overlays are warranted, which will occur separately to the draft LPS assessment process; • that the representation does not necessitate a modification to the draft LPS; and 20 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

• that the draft LPS satisfies the criteria at section 34(2) of the Act. 115. At the hearing, the planning authority was supportive of investigating the possibility of including a Scenic Road Corridor overlay. In a submission made following the hearing, the planning authority advised that it does not have the resources currently available to complete the work to prepare and justify mapping for inclusion in the draft LPS.

Commission consideration 116. The Commission accepts the position of the planning authority that further local strategic land use planning outside the draft LPS process is required to determine whether Scenic Road Corridor overlays are warranted, and accepts that there is insufficient strategic evidence to justify the application of Scenic Protection Code overlays at this time.

Commission decision 117. The Commission considers that no modifications are required.

Flood-Prone Areas Code – Flood-Prone Hazard Area Overlay and Table C11.1

Representation: Department of Police, Fire and Emergency Management (State Emergency Service) (2) 118. The representor requested that the Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay be applied to the Pieman River system, the Queen River, and various rivers at Strahan. 119. The representor noted that the following flood reporting has been undertaken for these water courses: • West Coast Council - Pieman River Flood Evacuation Plan 2013 (Entura); • Strahan Flood Mitigation Report for the West Coast Council 2007 (W.E. Endelar Pty Ltd); and • A report prepared for Copper Mines of Tasmania by GHD in 2015. 120. The representor noted that the State Government is undertaking a project (the Tasmanian Flood Mapping Project) to provide statewide flood mapping for implementation in all LPSs. 121. Furthermore, the representor advised that it supports the proposed zoning of the planning area, particularly the use of zones that provide for the management of density in flood-prone and coastal inundation hazard areas. 122. The representor also requested that an additional line be added to Table C11.1 specifying coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations not specified in the table. 123. In the section 35F report, the planning authority recommended that Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay should not be applied in the draft LPS at this time on the basis that data in the reports is currently not in a format suitable for inclusion in the draft LPS as a Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay. The planning authority also noted that the Tasmanian Flood Mapping Project is underway, and that it would prefer to amend the current Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay once that project is complete. 124. At the hearing, the representor stated that the Tasmanian Flood Mapping Project is forecast to be ready for implementation by late 2021. It is intended that the Pieman River Flood Evacuation Plan will be used to assist with mapping for the project. 125. At the hearing, the planning authority and the representor advised that the report prepared for Copper Mines of Tasmania was a private document and upon request was not provided by the copyright holder. However, a representative of Copper Mines of Tasmania advised that

21 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

the flood report is based on 1 in 500 and 1 in 1,000 year flooding events which is not relevant to land use planning controls that are based on 1 in 100 year events. 126. The representor acknowledged that, if the draft LPS was approved without a Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay, the intervening period would be covered by the provisions of the Code and in particular clause C12.2.4 of the SPPs. This clause would provide the planning authority with the power to require a flood hazard report in the event that an application is received within an area that the planning authority reasonably believes is subject to risk from flood or the development proposed has the potential to cause increased risk from flood. 127. All parties were supportive of adding a line to Table C11.1 specifying coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations not specified in the table.

Commission consideration 128. The Commission considers that the incorporation of Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay is premature as the data included in the Pieman River Flood Evacuation Plan and the Strahan Flood Mitigation Report is currently in the form of a model to which actual mapping has not yet been produced. As a result, there is insufficient evidence or information available at this time to demonstrate there should be a map and where it should be applied. It is noted that the report prepared for Copper Mines of Tasmania is inaccessible. 129. The Commission considers that mitigation can be addressed under clause C12.2.4 of the SPPs. As there is no mapping available, no modifications are necessary. Nevertheless, the Commission believes that there is value in having a mapped Flood-Prone Hazard Area overlay and that the planning authority should maintain an awareness that flooding is possible in certain areas while the statewide mapping is completed. 130. The Commission agrees that Table C11.1 be amended to include an additional line in the Table specifying coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations not specified in the table.

Commission decision 131. Modification: • Revise the draft LPS written document to include the technical modifications identified in Annexure A to the section 35K(1)(a) notice to include an additional line in Table C11.1 specifying coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations as follows:

All other 0.8 1.9 2.5 2.2 locations

22 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Other matters

Matters taken not to be a representation

132. A representor raised matters about the exemption provisions at clause 4.0 of the SPPs. 133. In the section 35F report the planning authority advised that the issues raised by TasNetworks regarding the clause 4.0 exemptions are policy positions in the SPPs and that the planning authority did not intend to make a recommendation under section 35G of the Act and instead recommended that TasNetworks take up the matter with the Minister for Planning.

Commission consideration 134. The Commission notes that: • section 35E of the Act sets out the matters not to be taken to be a representation; • other matters not subject to Part 3A of the Act cannot be considered as part of its consideration under section 35J; and • during its consideration, it has sought to establish how all the matters raised relate to the draft LPS and if the matters can be included within the draft LPS under section 32 of the Act. 135. The Commission considers that the parts of the representations listed above are outside the considerations under section 35J.

Commission decision 136. The Commission considers that it does not have jurisdiction to assess these matters.

Matters of a technical nature or relevant to implementation

137. The Commission notes the draft LPS contains matters that are relevant to section 35J(2) of the Act, including: • minor numbering and typographical errors in the draft LPS; • instances where the draft LPS or proposed modifications do not apply the writing style and conventions set out in Practice Note 5: Tasmanian Planning Scheme drafting conventions or Practice Note 8: Draft LPS written document - technical advice; • instances where the draft LPS zone and overlay maps or Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets contain overlaps, gaps and errors, or do not apply the technical advice or conventions set out in Practice Note 7 - Draft LPS mapping; technical advice or in Guideline No. 1 – Local Provisions Schedule (LPS): zone and code application; and • instances where a modification draft LPS maps and overlays requires a consequent modification to the other. 138. The Commission further notes that Division 1 – Electronic database and documents of Part 6 of the Act, requires the Commission to maintain a database containing an electronic planning map.

23 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Commission consideration 139. The Commission considers that the draft LPS should: • minimise numbering and typographical errors and be consistent with the conventions set out in the Commission Practice Notes; and • contain zone and overlay maps that reflect current cadastral parcel boundaries, be free from technical anomalies such as gaps and overlaps and be provided in a form suitable for being made under section 35L of the Act and inclusion in an electronic database.

Commission decision 140. Modification: • Revise the draft LPS written document to include the technical modifications identified in Annexure A to: - Include an additional line in Table C11.1 specifying coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations; and - meet the LPS requirements of the SPPs. • Revise the draft LPS zone and overlay maps to: - align zoning and overlays, based on the cadastral parcels dataset, with the most recent version of the cadastral parcels dataset available from theLIST; and - apply the schema set out in Appendix B of Practice Note 7 to each relevant GIS dataset. 141. Reason: To make modifications of a technical nature or relevant to the implementation of the Local Provisions Schedule if the Local Provisions Schedule were approved under section 35L of the Act and to be consistent with Guideline No. 1.

Attachments Attachment 1 – List of representations Attachment 2 – Notice to modify under section 35K(1)(a)

24 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Attachment 1

List of Representations

No Name 1. TasWater

2. Department of Police, Fire and Emergency Management - State Emergency Service

3. Tullah Progress Association Inc.

4. West Coast Wilderness Railway

5. TasRail

6. Bob Brown Foundation

7. Department of State Growth

8. Hydro Tasmania

9. Kim Lai, Jane Bennett, Aaron Chen, Greg Clark, Skyridge Pty Ltd

10. TasNetworks

11. Steve de Villiers

25 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Attachment 2 Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993

Notice to modify under section 35K(1)(a)

West Coast Draft LPS

23 March 2021 The Tasmanian Planning Commission (the Commission) directs that the West Coast planning authority modify the West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule (draft LPS) as follows: 1.0 Code lists 1.1 In table WCO-Table C11.1 Coastal Inundation Hazard Bands AHD Levels, specify the coastal inundation hazard band AHD levels for all other locations, as set out in Annexure A. Reason: To meet the LPS requirements of the SPPs and Practice Note 8. 2.0 Zone maps and overlays No. Description Direction and Reason 2.1 Zoning of Western Tasmania Revise the zoning of that part of Heemskirk Road, Aboriginal Cultural Landscape Granville Harbour PID 3388557 that is within the Western Tasmania Aboriginal Cultural Landscape to Environmental Management. Ensure that split-zoning annotations are applied in accordance with Practice Note 7. Reason: To apply the Environmental Management Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1. 2.2 Zoning of water resevoirs Revise the zoning of Robinson Street, Zeehan, PID 3279158 (3 land parcels) to Utilities. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1. 2.3 Zoning of state rail Revise the zoning of the Melba Flats Siding, Murchison infrastructure Highway, West Coast, PID 3215509 (2 land parcels) to Utilities. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1. 2.4 Zoning of electricity supply 1. Revise the zoning of the following sites to the Utilities infrastructure Zone, consistent with the boundaries shown in Attachment A of the Hydro Tasmania representation dated 16 October 2020: - John Butters Power Station; - Crotty Dam; - Darwin Dam; - Margaret Dam; - Upper Lake Margaret Power Station; Lower Lake Margaret Power Station; 26 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

- Reece Dam and Power Station; - Bastyan Dam and Power Station; - Mackintosh Dam, Mackintosh Power Station, and Tullibardine Dam; - Murchison Dam; - Tribute Power Station; - Anthony Dam and Levee; - Newton Dam and Pumps; - Henty Dam; - White Spur Dam; and - Dam on Hall Rivulet Canal. 2. Revise the zoning of the following switching station and communication sites to the Utilities Zone: - Mt Read Communication Site PID 2531630; and - Pieman Switching Station, with the split zone defined by direct lines between the following coordinates: - E344002.32 N5379514.65; - E344005.32 N5379630.25; - E344173.52 N5379630.25; and - E344173.52 N5379514.65. 3. Apply the Utilities Zone to a 20m radius circle around the following communications sites: - Mt Kershaw Passive Reflector Communication Site located at E378322.71 N5380551.83; - Pieman Dam Repeater Communication Site located at E344471.00 N5379115.85; and - John Butters Repeater Communication Site located at E378790.78 N5333206.53. Ensure that any public roads are appropriately zoned to centerlines, and apply split-zoning annotations as necessary in accordance with Practice Note 7. Reason: To apply the Utilities Zone consistent with the purpose of the zone and Guideline No. 1. 2.5 Revise the application of the 1. Modify the Electricity Transmission Infrastructure electricity transmission Protection overlay by adding the Code overlays for infrastructure protection the Pieman Switching Station, the Pieman Spur (Line overlay to electricity 522), and the Pieman to Granville Spur (Line 534) infrastructure consistent with the mapping provided by the TasNetworks in its submission dated 5 March 2021. 2. Apply the Substation Facility Buffer Area overlay to the whole of the Rosebery substation at Arthur Street, Rosebery folio of the Register 169884/1. Reason: To apply the electricity transmission infrastructure protection overlay consistent with the purpose of the Electricity Transmission Infrastructure Protection Code and Guideline No. 1. 3.0 Consequential and technical implementation

27 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

3.1 Revise the draft LPS written document to include the identified technical modifications identified in Annexure A to: (a) meet the LPS requirements of the SPPs; (b) correct references to relevant provisions; (c) provide for the effective operation of the provisions; and (d) reflect the terminology used in the SPPs, and 3.2 Revise the draft LPS zone and overlay maps to: (a) fill any unzoned gaps in the zoning layer; (b) remove any overlaps between adjoining zones; (c) remove any overlaps between features in the same overlay layers that have different categories (excluding for transitioning local area objectives of SAPs and PPZs), such as; coastal inundation investigation areas and low coastal inundation hazard band; (d) aggregate adjoining zone or overlay polygons sharing the same category, such as, zone type, landslip hazard band, and aggregate adjoining overlay polygons that have no required category, such as, priority vegetation area; (e) align the boundaries of zones and parcel dependant overlays with parcel boundaries, based on the most recent version of the cadastral parcels dataset available from theLIST; and (f) present all GIS data in the recommended Geodatabase format provided to council by the Commission, Reason: To make modifications of a technical nature or relevant to the implementation of the Local Provisions Schedule if approved under section 35L of the Act.

28 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Annexure A Modifications to West Coast draft LPS written document

29 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

TABLE OF CONTENTS

WCO-Local Provisions Schedule Title

WCO-Effective Date

WCO-Local Area Objectives

WCO-Particular Purpose Zones

WCO-Specific Area Plans WCO-S1.0 Queenstown Specific Area Plan WCO-S2.0 Strahan Harbour Specific Area Plan

WCO-Site-specific Qualifications

WCO-Code Lists

WCO-Applied, Adopted and Incorporated Documents

30 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

West Coast Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Local Provisions Schedule Title

WCO-1.1 This Local Provisions Schedule is called the West Coast Local Provisions Schedule and comprises all the land within the municipal area.

WCO Effective Date

WCO-1.2 The effective date for this Local Provisions Schedule is .

WCO-Local Area Objectives

This clause is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule.

WCO-Particular Purpose Zones

There are no particular purpose zones in this Local Provisions Schedule.

31 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S1.0 Queenstown Specific Area Plan

WCO-S1.1 Plan Purpose

The purpose of the Queenstown Specific Area Plan is:

WCO-S1.1.1 To maintain the established streetscape character of the town through controls on building setbacks and envelopes.

WCO-S1.2 Application of this Plan

WCO-S1.2.1 The specific area plan applies to the area of land designated as Queenstown Specific Area Plan on the overlay maps and Figure WCO-S1.1.

WCO-S1.2.2 In the area of land to which this plan applies, the provisions of the specific area plan are in substitution for the provisions of the General Residential Zone and the General Business Zone, as specified in the relevant provision.

Figure WCO-S1.1 Queenstown Specific Area Plan as referenced in clause WCO-S1.2.1

32 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S1.3 Local Area Objectives

Reference Number Area Description Local Area Objectives

WCO-S1.3.1 Residential Precinct – shown on The local area objectives for the Figure WCO-S1.1. Residential Precinct are:

(a) to continue a uniform setback pattern of dwellings and non-residential buildings from a frontage; and

(b) to provide for a building setback pattern compatible with the development pattern of the streetscape.

WCO-S1.3.2 Business Precinct – shown on The local area objective for the Business Figure WCO-S1.1. Precinct is:

(a) to provide for buildings to be built to the site frontage and to be a dominant feature in the streetscape.

WCO-S1.4 Definition of Terms

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S1.5 Use Table

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S1.6 Use Standards

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

33 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S1.7 Development Standards for Buildings and Works

WCO-S1.7.1 Frontage setback in the Residential Precinct

This clause is in substitution for General Residential Zone – clause 8.4.2 Setbacks and building envelopes for all dwellings, and clause 8.5.1 A1 and P1, and A2 and P2 Non-dwelling development.

Objective: That the siting and scale of buildings:

(a) provides reasonably consistent separation between buildings and their frontage within a street;

(b) provides consistency in the apparent scale, bulk, massing and proportion of buildings;

(c) provides separation between buildings on adjoining properties to allow reasonable opportunity for daylight and sunlight to enter habitable rooms and private open space; and

(d) provides reasonable access to sunlight for existing solar energy installations.

Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria

A1 P1

Buildings in the Residential Precinct shown in A building in the Residential Precinct shown in Figure Figure WCO-S1.1, excluding garages, carports and WCO-S1.1, excluding garages, carports and protrusions that extend not more than 0.9m into the protrusions that extend not more than 0.9m into the frontage setback, must have a setback from a frontage setback must have a setback from a frontage frontage that is: that is compatible with the streetscape, having regard (a) if the frontage is a primary frontage, not less to: than 2m, or, if the setback from the primary (a) the local area objective; frontage is less than 2m, not less than the (b) the topography of the site; setback, from the primary frontage, of any existing building on the site; (c) the established setback from a frontage of existing buildings on the site and adjacent (b) if the frontage is not a primary frontage, not buildings; less than 2m, or, if the setback from the frontage is less than 2m, not less than the (d) the design, scale and siting of a proposed setback, from a frontage that is not a primary building; and

frontage, of any existing building on the site; (e) the visual prominence of the proposed building and facade within the streetscape. (c) if for a vacant site and there are existing dwellings on adjoining properties on the same street, not more than the greater, or less than the lesser, setback for the equivalent frontage of the dwellings on the adjoining sites on the same street.

34 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

A2 P2 A garage or carport for a dwelling in the Residential A garage or carport for a dwelling in the Residential Precinct Figure as shown in WCO-S1.1 must have a Precinct Figure as shown in WCO-S1.1 must have a setback from a primary frontage of not less than: setback from a primary frontage that is compatible with the setbacks of existing garages or carports in (a) 5.5m, or alternatively 1m behind the building the street, having regard to any topographical line; constraints. (b) the same as the building line, if a portion of the dwelling gross floor area is located above the garage or carport; or

(c) 1m, if the existing ground level slopes up or down at a gradient steeper than 1 in 5 for a distance of 10m from the frontage.

A3 P3

A building in the Residential Precinct, excluding The siting and scale of a building in the Residential outbuildings with a building height of not more than Precinct shown on Figure WCO-S1.1, must: 2.4m and protrusions that extend not more than (a) not cause an unreasonable loss of amenity to 0.9m horizontally beyond the building envelope, adjoining properties, having regard to: must: (a) be contained within a building envelope (refer (i) reduction in sunlight to a habitable room to Figures WCO-S1.2, WCO-S1.3 and WCO- (other than a bedroom) of a dwelling on an S1.4) determined by: adjoining property; (ii) overshadowing the private open space of a (i) a distance equal to the frontage setback or, dwelling on an adjoining property; for an internal lot, a distance of 4.5m from the rear boundary of a property with an (iii) overshadowing of an adjoining vacant adjoining frontage; and property; or

(ii) projecting a line at an angle of 45 degrees (iv) visual impacts caused by the apparent from the horizontal at a height of 3m above scale, bulk or proportions of the dwelling existing ground level at the side and rear when viewed from an adjoining property;

boundaries to a building height of not more (b) provide separation between buildings on than 8.5m above existing ground level; and adjoining properties that is consistent with that (b) only have a setback of less than 1.5m from a existing on established properties in the area; side or rear boundary if the dwelling: and

(i) does not extend beyond an existing (c) not cause an unreasonable reduction in sunlight building built on or within 0.2m of the to an existing solar energy installation on:

boundary of the adjoining property; or (i) an adjoining property; or

(ii) does not exceed a total length of 9m or one (ii) another dwelling on the same site. third the length of the side boundary (whichever is the lesser).

35 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Figure WCO-S1.2 Building envelope as required by clause WCO-S1.7.1 A3(a)

Figure WCO-S1.3 Building envelope for corner lots as required clause WCO-S1.7.1 A3(a)

36 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Figure WCO-S1.4 Building envelope for corner lots as required clause WCO-S1.7.1 A3(a)

37 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S1.7.2 Frontage setback in the Business Precinct

This clause is in substitution for General Business Zone – clause 15.4.2 Setbacks A1 and P1.

Objective: That building setback:

(a) is compatible with the streetscape; and

(b) minimises opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour through setback of buildings.

A1 P1

Buildings in the Business Precinct shown in Figure Buildings in the Business Precinct shown in Figure WCO-S1.1 must be built to the frontage at ground WCO-S1.1 must have a setback from a frontage that level. is compatible with the streetscape and minimises opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour, having regard to: (a) the local area objective;

(b) the topography of the site;

(c) the established setback from a frontage of existing buildings on the site and adjacent buildings;

(d) the design, scale and siting of a proposed building;

(e) the visual prominence of the proposed building facade within the streetscape;

(f) providing small variations in building alignment to break up long facades; and

(g) the availability of lighting.

WCO-S1.8 Development Standards for Subdivision

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S1.9 Tables

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

38 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S2.0 Strahan Harbour Specific Area Plan

WCO-S2.1 Plan Purpose

The purpose of the Strahan Harbour Specific Area Plan is:

WCO-S2.1.1 To protect the streetscape character of Strahan when viewed from roads, public places and from within the Strahan Harbour, through controls on building height.

WCO-S2.2 Application of this Plan

WCO-S2.2.1 The specific area plan applies to the area of land designated as Strahan Harbour Specific Area Plan on the overlay maps and shown in Figure WCO-S2.1.

WCO-S2.2.2 In the area of land to which this plan applies, the provisions of the specific area plan are in substitution for the provisions in the Local Business Zone and Rural Zone as specified in the relevant provision.

WCO-S2.3 Local Area Objectives

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

Figure WCO-S2.1 Strahan Harbour Specific Area Plan as referred to in clause WCO-S2.2.1.

39 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-S2.4 Definition of Terms

WCO-2.4.1 In this Specific Area Plan, unless the contrary intention appears:

Terms Definition

Strahan Harbour means the body of water identified in Figure WCO-S2.1

WCO-S2.5 Use Table

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S2.6 Use Standards

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S2.7 Development Standards for Buildings and Works

WCO-S2.7.1 Building height

This clause is in substitution for Local Business Zone – clause 13.4.1 Building height, and Rural Zone – clause 20.4.1 Building height.

Objective: That building height within the Strahan Wharf Precinct and Tourist Railway Precinct:

(a) is compatible with the streetscape and character of the respective Precinct, particularly when viewed from roads, public places and from within the Strahan Harbour;

(b) does not cause an unreasonable loss of amenity to adjacent properties;

(c) is sympathetic to the bulk and scale of existing buildings in the respective Precinct; and

(d) protects important vistas and the visual amenity of Strahan when viewed from within the Strahan Harbour.

Acceptable Solutions Performance Criteria

A1 P1

Building height must not be more than: Building height in the Strahan Wharf Precinct and the Tourist Railway Precinct must be compatible with the (a) 8m in the Strahan Wharf Precinct shown in streetscape and character of development on Figure WCO-S2.1; and adjacent properties in the respective areas, having (b) 6m in the Tourist Railway Precinct shown in regard to: Figure WCO-S2.1. (a) the topography of the site;

(b) the height, bulk and form of existing buildings on the site and adjacent properties;

(c) the bulk and form of proposed buildings;

40 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

(d) the visual prominence of the proposed buildings when viewed from roads, public places and the Strahan Harbour; and

(e) any overshadowing of adjoining properties and public places.

WCO-S2.8 Development Standards for Subdivision

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

WCO-S2.9 Tables

This sub-clause is not used in this specific area plan.

41 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Site-specific Qualifications

Reference Site reference Folio of the Description (modification, Relevant Clause Number Register substitution or addition) in State Planning Provisions

This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Code Lists

WCO-Table C3.1 Other Major Roads

Road From To

Anthony Road Murchison Highway Zeehan Highway

WCO-Table C6.1 Local Heritage Places Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.1 Not Queenstown Driffield Not Includes, but Description applicable Street applicable not limited to Former Mt Lyell Mining & 132985/1, Railway Company, Railway 24419/101 Station Complex, Conservation and Area. 134155/1 Current building is recent replacement of that burnt down in 1990s. Specific Extent Property ID 1941777 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Site is significant as the railway station complex that was the primary entrance to the town prior to 1935 and has strong historic and social significance.

C6.1.2 Not Queenstown Approximatel Not Not Description applicable y parallel to applicable applicable Former Mt Lyell Permanent Driffield Way. Street Statement of Local Historic heading Heritage Significance and south Historic Heritage Values

42 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Strong associations with the construction and operation of the railway line which formed Queenstown’s only transport link with the outside world until 1935. Important element in demonstrating the arrangement and layout of the historic town.

C6.1.3 Not Queenstown 30 & 32 Not 10844/1 and Description applicable Penghana applicable 10844/2 Pair of former Railway Road Cottages. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Pair of cottages have strong association with the former railway and the lifestyle of railway workers.

C6.1.4 Not Queenstown 1 Penghana Not 238475/1 Description applicable Road applicable Former Single Men's Quarters. (Zeehan Statement of Local Historic Highway) Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with the early twentieth century expansion of the mine and illustrate the lifestyle and facilities provided for single men. Converted to tourist accommodation in 1980s in association with the towns tourist industry.

C6.1.5 Not Queenstown Penghana Not Not Description applicable Road applicable applicable Mt Lyell Mining & Railway Company Mining Lease. Specific Extent Property ID 7772249 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Place of outstanding environmental heritage value which is held in high regard by the local community. The mine is a visual and psychological icon for the people of Queenstown.

C6.1.6 Not Queenstown 17 Penghana Not 24418/1 Description applicable Road - (most applicable Cottage. northerly Lyell Specific Extent Highway) Property ID 5881126

43 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Victorian Georgian cottage has strong associations with the early period of development of the Mt Lyell Mine and is representative of the lifestyle of early workers.

C6.1.7 Not Queenstown 15 Penghana Not 243997/1 Description applicable Road - North applicable Cottage. West of Mine Specific Extent Office Property ID 5881118 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Italianate cottage is a former Mount Lyell company house and has strong associations with the operations of the historic mine.

C6.1.8 Not Queenstown 26 Esplanade Not 214436/10 Description applicable applicable Company Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Federation bungalow has strong associations with the Mount Lyell Mine and Railway Company and demonstrates the early expectations and lifestyle of the management personnel.

C6.1.9 Not Queenstown 2 Esplanade Not 252457/1 Description applicable applicable Mine Manager's Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Large residence built on a grand scale is a fine example of the mid-twentieth century Queenstown bungalow. Within Queenstown the residence is rare for its size, fine workmanship and details.

C6.1.10 Not Queenstown 28 Esplanade Comre 208885/8 Description applicable and 207517/9 1917 residence built for the chief Metallurgist. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

44 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Large weatherboard residence has strong associations with Mt Lyell as a residence and guest house.

C6.1.11 Not Queenstown 1 & 3 Jenico Not 207010/5, Description applicable Street and applicable 233951/1 and Spion Kop. Latrobe 160533/3 Statement of Local Historic Street Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A local land mark associated with the towns returned soldiers from the Boer War. The hill is also an important sight-seeing vantage point and has become the repository for several pieces of relocated mining equipment.

C6.1.12 Not Queenstown 9 Penghana Not 126634/1 Description applicable Road applicable Former Flux Quarry. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Strong associations with the earliest periods of operations of the Mount Lyell Mine. It is a well-known local landmark and historic site.

C6.1.13 Not Queenstown Off Alfred Queenstown Not Description applicable Street and off Pioneer applicable Cemetery. Conlan Street Cemetary Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Oldest burial ground in Queenstown – has strong associations with the pioneers of the town.

C6.1.14 Not Queenstown 4 Lynchford Queenstown 156720/1 Description applicable Road, Cemetery Cemetery. Queenstown Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Cemetery has strong associations with 1912 North Lyell Mine disaster. Also contains rare surviving huon pine monuments from early 20th century.

C6.1.15 Not Queenstown Queen River Not 26290/24 Description applicable applicable Queen River. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

45 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Graphic illustration of the mining base of Queenstown. It is symbolic of the growth of industry in the town.

C6.1.16 Not Queenstown Lynchford Not 208512/1 Description applicable Road - Off applicable and Queenstown Golf Course. Conlan Street 211980/1 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Very attractive English picturesque landscape transplanted to the West Coast. It evidences the origins of the local people and the importance of recreational pursuits.

C6.1.17 Not Queenstown Rifle range Not Description applicable area applicable End of Former Brickworks. Raggedy Specific Extent Street (now Preston Property ID 5882495 Street) Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Provided bricks from 1894 for the two furnace stacks - operated till 1920 providing bricks for majority of masonry buildings in the town.

C6.1.18 Not Queenstown Corner Not Not Description applicable Penghana applicable applicable Park. Road and Statement of Local Historic Jakins Street Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Park established when site was vacated as railway yards after 1965. Part of the northern suburbs construction works coinciding with the peak copper price of the late 1960s.

C6.1.19 Not Queenstown Corner Not Not Description applicable Driffield applicable applicable War Memorial Park. Street and Statement of Local Historic Orr Street, Heritage Significance and Queenstown Historic Heritage Values Represents Queenstown’s contribution to both World Wars. The small park a rare item in central Queenstown.

C6.1.20 Not Queenstown 12-14 Orr Not 12463/4 Description applicable Street applicable Supermarket/Jim Young electrical. 46 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values One of first stores in Queenstown. Its layout and arrangements illustrate the size and arrangement of the pioneering stores.

C6.1.21 Not Queenstown Powell Street Not Not Description applicable (north side) applicable applicable F.O. Henry Staff Residence including Group. MacNamarra Specific Extent St corner and MacNamarra Property ID 5878939 and Mellor Statement of Local Historic Street corner Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Group of residences have strong associations with F.O. Henry. Group illustrate the paternal managerial style and operation necessities of storekeeping in a mining town.

C6.1.22 Not Queenstown 1-5 Orr Street Not 225167/1 Description applicable applicable Mount Lyell Motor Inn. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values One of the oldest buildings in Queenstown and has strong historic associations with the earliest period of development in the town. Hotel is a rare surviving two-storey timber hotel with surviving original fabric particularly in the first floor façade.

C6.1.23 Not Queenstown Hunter Street Not 176067 Description applicable applicable Former Dance Hall/Night Club and Caberet flats. Specific Extent FR 244312/1 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An interesting combination of fine woodwork details to the front and ground floor and sheet materials to the rear walls. The structure has strong associations with post World War II Queenstown.

C6.1.24 Not Queenstown 33 Orr Street Not 109618/1 Description applicable applicable 47 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Former National Bank of Tasmania. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Two-storey masonry building in the federation free Classical style in a fine architectural composition which incorporates a number of classical motifs in a mannered and ordered way. The only early bank building left in the town.

C6.1.25 Not Queenstown Cutten Street Not 140390/2 Description applicable applicable Queenstown Public School. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Interwar functionalist architecture which is rare on the West Coast. It was a major institution in the town and has strong associations for many Queenstown residents.

C6.1.26 Not Queenstown 53 Orr St Not 109618/5 Description applicable applicable Gaiety hall. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Strong associations with the early lifestyle of Queenstown and the former arrangement and layout of the town.

C6.1.27 Not Queenstown 13-15 Orr Not 120069/1 Description applicable Street applicable and 44672/3 Queenstown Gentleman's Club Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Original offices of the Mt Lyell Standard, Queenstown’s local newspaper from 1896 to 1902. After this it became the Queenstown Club. Current building constructed most likely in early 20th century.

C6.1.28 Not Queenstown 34 Esplanade Not 231708/1 Description applicable (off Preston applicable Residence (former hospital). Street) Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Italianate residence occupies a landmark position in the town

48 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values and exhibits fine timber and architectural details. Constructed as a residence in 1896, it was used as a hospital when Penghana Town burnt down in 1896.

C6.1.29 Not Queenstown 45 Bowes Not 244782/12 Description applicable Street applicable Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Substantial residence is rare quality private home exhibiting consistent architectural style from the exterior to the interior and details. Rare architectural composition in Queenstown and on the West Coast.

C6.1.30 Not Queenstown Sticht Street - Not Not Description applicable outside applicable applicable Original Street Lamps Former Statement of Local Historic Council Heritage Significance and Chambers Historic Heritage Values Rare element of early arrangement of Queenstown streets and graphically illustrates the technology and style of the early township.

C6.1.31 Not Queenstown Driffield Not Not Description applicable Street applicable applicable Miners Siding. (opposite Specific Extent Sticht St) Property ID 7483711 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A local monument which has significance to the people of Queenstown especially those who helped in its construction. It attempts to represent the railway and mining history in the historic railway precinct.

C6.1.32 Not Strahan 9 Innes Street Not 210836 Description applicable applicable Birch Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An interesting modesty dwelling in the Victorian Georgian style associated with the historic development of the area and its policing requirements.

49 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.33 Not Strahan 7 Innes Street Not 164522/1 Description applicable applicable Police Superintendents Office. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An unusual small architectural composition. The office of the area Superintendent of police - A remarkable assemblage of joinery details.

C6.1.34 Not Strahan 2 Bay Street Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Strahan Public School. Specific Extent Property ID 5985152 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Representative of the InterWar Art Deco style school building. It is classical in its symmetry, horizontality and façade emphatic treatment to the entrance.

C6.1.35 Not Strahan 9 Esplanade Not 197341/1 Description applicable applicable Railway Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Part of Zeehan-Strahan railway works. It is an example of the simple railway related architecture.

C6.1.36 Not Strahan 1 Harold Not 101363/1 Description applicable Street applicable and 54659/1 The Royal Bank of Avram. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values One of a pair, it is an interesting townscape element.

C6.1.37 Not Strahan 3 Harold Not 235798/1 Description Street applicable applicable AB Divers Inn now Lolly shop. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A component of vestigial streetscape. One of pair which display similar characteristics - interesting example of corrugated iron and pressed metal as an external cladding.

50 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.38 Not Strahan 1 Innes Street Not 224170/4 Description West applicable applicable "Manuka" Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Demonstrates the process of evolution and gentrification common to the original frontier style corrugated iron dwellings.

C6.1.39 Not Strahan 21-25 Not 224710/5 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Strahan Council Chambers. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An impressive streetscape component. A structure of considerable historic and aesthetic quality. Associated with the turn of the century boom period. A fine representative of the Victorian Free Classical style.

C6.1.40 Not Strahan 29-37 Not 72499/1 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Strahan Newsagency. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with the early trading and merchant pattern in Strahan.

C6.1.41 Not Strahan 29-37 Not 222814/1 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Fabulous Food Store. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with the early trading and merchant pattern in Strahan.

C6.1.42 Not Strahan Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Anzac memorial Park and War Memorial. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Monument commemorating the Strahan dead during first and second world wars. An area of reclaimed land in 1890s dedicated to public open space.

C6.1.43 Not Strahan 69 Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable 51 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values People's Park Botanical Reserve (incl. Hogarth Falls). Specific Extent Property ID 5985582 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Historic public open space which demonstrates an early appreciation of the beauties of the natural landscape. A significant public space and natural bushland area.

C6.1.44 Not Strahan Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Gabled roofed corrugated iron shed (partially demolished). Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with Union Steamship Company and the boom period of Strahan.

C6.1.45 Not Strahan Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Risby's Jetty (demolished - some pylons remain). Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Was built mainly of Huon Pine and was associated with Risby's sawmill.

C6.1.46 Not Strahan Esplanade Not 143909/1 Description applicable applicable Marine Board and Main Wharf Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with the growth of the importance of the port and the development of the railways. Modified beyond recognition of historic elements.

C6.1.47 Not Strahan Foreshore Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Former railway line connection between Zeehan government line and the Mt Lyell line. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Significant historic foreshore element. Remaining segments

52 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values now utilised as foreshore walkway.

C6.1.48 Not Strahan 12Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Morrisons Huon Pine Saw Mill. Specific Extent Property ID 1820123 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Sole remnant of a number of working sawmills which once characterised the waterfront.

C6.1.49 Not Strahan 12Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Backleg Crane. Specific Extent Property ID 1820123 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values The backleg crane is a rare survivor of the former machinery which once dotted the foreshore.

C6.1.50 Not Strahan Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Former Strahan wharfs and r piles. Specific Extent Property ID 1730822 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Modified beyond recognition through wharf redevelopment and extension.

C6.1.51 Not Strahan 90 Harvey Not 7413/1 Description Street applicable applicable Western Softwoods Sawmill. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Operating sawmill typical of sawmills that characterised the town.

C6.1.52 Not Strahan Harvey Not Not Description applicable Street opposit applicable applicable e Prangley Former Strahan Abattoir. Street Specific Extent Property ID 3119904

53 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Indicates the extent of the township’s past self- sufficiency.

C6.1.53 Not Strahan Harvey Street Not Not Description applicable - outside applicable applicable Abattoir Conveyor. Specific Extent Property ID 3119904 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Coal loader which was part of equipment at Regatta Point associated with the steam era.

C6.1.54 Not Strahan 5 Sarson Not 154401/8 Description applicable Close - off applicable Ocean Beach Strahan Lodge. Ex Road Gormanston mine managers residence residence transported to site. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Substantial and attractive weatherboard residence of regency and Italianate features.

C6.1.55 Not Strahan 61 Harvey Not 212846/11 Description Street applicable applicable Harvey Street Group. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Part of an ensemble of residences associated with the Strahan - Zeehan railway line.

C6.1.56 Not Strahan 63 Harvey Not 212845/10 Description Street applicable applicable Harvey Street Group Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Part of an ensemble of residences associated with the Strahan - Zeehan railway line.

C6.1.57 Not Strahan 2 Pontifex Not 220718/27 Description Street applicable applicable Pontifax Street Group. Former engine drivers houses. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

54 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Victorian Italianate cottages associated with the Strahan - Zeehan Government railway line.

C6.1.58 Not Strahan 4 Pontifex Not 112225/26 Description Street applicable applicable Pontifax Street Group. Former engine drivers houses. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Victorian Italianate cottages associated with the Strahan - Zeehan Government railway line.

C6.1.59 Not Strahan 6 Pontifex Not 56847/25 Description Street applicable applicable Pontifax Street Group. Former engine drivers houses. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Victorian Italianate cottages associated with the Strahan - Zeehan Government railway line.

C6.1.60 Not Strahan 61 Meredith Not 104238/1 Description Street applicable applicable Sawmill Relic Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Remnant of the steam engine which powered the former Pine Export Company sawmill.

C6.1.61 Not Strahan 59 Meredith Not 81767/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage and rear Outbuildings. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with former Grinings sawmill. Good example of a simple gable and skillion roof with picturesque outbuilding.

C6.1.62 Not Strahan 4 Harvey Not 93327/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A significant streetscape element.

C6.1.63 Not Strahan 6 Harvey Not 220729/14 Description applicable Street applicable 55 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A fine example of a Victorian Italianate style with particularly fine and unusual detailing and joinery. A significant streetscape element.

C6.1.64 Not Strahan 11 Harvey Not 222336/1 Description Street applicable applicable Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Example of a vernacular cottage in federation Italianate style.

C6.1.65 Not Strahan 6 Lynch Not 164927/1 Description Street applicable applicable Double Fronted Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A significant example of the vernacular Victorian Regency style. Associated with the Marine Board and the importance of Strahan Harbour. A significant townscape and cliffscape element.

C6.1.66 Not Strahan 8 Lynch Not 39703/1 Description Street applicable applicable Former Marine Board House. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An elaborately decorated Victorian Italianate style. A significant townscape and cliffscape element. Associated with the Marine Board and the importance of Strahan as a port.

C6.1.67 Not Strahan 10 Innes Not 137470/1 Description Street applicable applicable "Neath" ResidenceBehind shop. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Representative vernacular Victorian Italianate style.

C6.1.68 Not Strahan 24 Fraser Not 63219/1 Description Street applicable applicable "Wiamatie" Cottage. 56 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values The original F.O. Henry residence originally located behind the pioneer store. An example of a relocated home which is a practice common in the area. A Georgian vernacular cottage.

C6.1.69 Not Strahan 3-5 Hurst Not 244325/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A vernacular Victorian Regency cottage. A cottage constructed of combined materials which illustrate the frontier nature of the settlement.

C6.1.70 Not Strahan 1 Hurst Street Not 208886/6 Description applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A simple late Victorian Italianate cottage with unusual timber details.

C6.1.71 Not Strahan 39 Lynch Not 233444/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A residence associated with the Grining family, an historic Strahan family. A simple vernacular cottage in the Victorian Regency style.

C6.1.72 Not Strahan 41 Lynch Not 36318/1 and Description Street 214718/8 applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A former private hospital operated by a midwife.

C6.1.73 Not Strahan 47 Lynch Not 232914/1 Description Street applicable applicable Bow Fronted Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

57 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An interesting vernacular Victorian Italianate style villa (similar to Neath).

C6.1.74 Not Strahan 51 Lynch Not 224709/1 Description Street applicable applicable Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A residence constructed for the manager of the Union Steamship Company. An interesting Victorian Free Classical style.

C6.1.75 Not Strahan 17 Reid Not 82866/8 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Simple vernacular georgian style cottage with a number of original features.

C6.1.76 Not Strahan 2 Reid Street Not 249601/6 Description applicable and 4 Reid applicable Street Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A distinctive and unusual vernacular Italianate style cottage with elaborate timber detailing. A significant cliffscape element.

C6.1.77 Not Strahan 71 Esplanade Not 205527/2 Description applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An unusual vernacular style with transitional regency elements. This cottage demonstrates the development of architectural styles based on simple cottage forms.

C6.1.78 Not Strahan 73 Esplanade Not 233411/1 Description applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A characteristic symmetrical Georgian vernacular residence. This cottage is a significant streetscape element. 58 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.79 Not Strahan 7-9 Vivian Not 223745/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Vernacular Italianate jerkinhead gable style.

C6.1.80 Not Strahan 75 Not 243227/1 Description applicable Esplanade, applicable Lot 2 Franklin Manor. Esplanade, Statement of Local Historic Flat 1 & 2 79 Heritage Significance and Esplanade, Historic Heritage Values and 77 Esplanade A grand residence associated with the first Master Warden of Strahan, Captain Edward Miles. One of only two private mansions of the region. A fine example of Victorian Rustic Gothic.

C6.1.81 Not Strahan 2 Vivian Not 232672/5 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Vernacular Italianate with a number of decorative features characteristic of the township. Associated with F.O. Henry enterprise.

C6.1.82 Not Strahan 5 Vivian Not 232183/1 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Vernacular cottage in varied forms showing the buildings growth and evolution in a picturesque setting.

C6.1.83 Not Strahan Lodder Street Not 127682/1 Description applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Demonstrates use of readily available materials in Victorian Georgian cottage form. Also illustrates importance of facade treatment as demonstration of gentrification.

C6.1.84 Not Strahan 1-3 Not 231491/1 Description applicable Featherstone applicable Street Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

59 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Simple vernacular Victorian cottage style - demonstrates early lifestyles of the area.

C6.1.85 Not Strahan 5 Not 216177/4 Description applicable Featherstone applicable Street Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Simple vernacular 1890 cottage originally built in Trafford Street.

C6.1.86 Not Strahan 83 Esplanade Not 210945/8 Description applicable applicable Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values The former cottage hospital for the district. This large residence has important historic association and considerable aesthetic quality expressing several phases of its life. Victorian Free Classical Eclectic style.

C6.1.87 Not Strahan 8 Harrison Not 132803/2 Description Street applicable applicable Residence. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values An interesting vernacular interpretation of the Victorian Free Classical style. An important skyline element.

C6.1.88 Not Strahan Esplanade, Not Not Description Regatta Point applicable applicable applicable Regatta Point Wharf. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Wharf was terminus of the Mt Lyell Railway and was the trans shipment point for all ore from Mt Lyell mine. A key element of the Strahan waterfront. Regatta Point Wharf is an historical foreshore element.

C6.1.89 Not Strahan The Not 168848/1 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Former Regatta Point Turntable. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

60 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Of high archaeological potential. Historical association with Mt Lyell Railway and Regatta Point wharf complex operations.

C6.1.90 Not Strahan 115 Not 8463/4 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Simple cottage in Mt Lyell railway Victorian vernacular Georgian style. Component of a circle of railway cottages for the Mt Lyell Company at Regatta Point.

C6.1.91 Not Strahan 119 Not 8463/2 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Stylish cottage in Mt Lyell railway vernacular Victorian regency style. Component of a circle of railway cottages for the Mt Lyell Company at Regatta Point.

C6.1.92 Not Strahan 117 Not 8463/3 Description Esplanade applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Simple cottage in Mt Lyell railway vernacular Victorian Georgian style. Component of a circle of railway cottages for the Mt Lyell Company at Regatta Point.

C6.1.93 Not Strahan Bromley Not Not Description Street applicable applicable applicable Cemetery. Specific Extent Property ID 7271743 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Developed on high, not waterlogged land, thought to contain bodies of many shipwreck victims as well as pioneers and prominent citizens.

61 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.94 Not Strahan Esplanade Not Not Description applicable applicable applicable Former Pyritic Ore Wharf. Specific Extent Property ID 7759626 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Little is known about the wharf except that it was the trans- shipment point for Pyritic ore.

C6.1.95 Not Strahan Permanent Not Includes Description Way 243143/3 applicable applicable Mt Lyell Abt Railway Formation. Specific Extent Property ID 7759626 and 5990904 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Opened in 1899 when Teepookana trans-shipment location was relocated to Regatta Point.

C6.1.96 Not Strahan Regatta Point Not Not Description Wharf applicable applicable applicable Mobile Steam Crane. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Steam crane No 387, Grafton and company engineers of Bedford England. Relocated from Teepookana.

C6.1.97 Not Strahan 32 Andrew Not 234771/1 Description Street applicable applicable Residence. Former Strahan bakery. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Combined bakery and residence represents early town self-contained period. Significant and attractive streetscape element.

C6.1.98 Not Strahan 3 Henry Not 54984/25 Description Street applicable applicable Cottage. Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Modest Victorian Georgian style residence.

62 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values

C6.1.99 Not Strahan Foreshore Not Not Description applicable south of Bay applicable applicable Street West Strahan Piers. Specific Extent Property ID 5985961 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Associated with development of the Strahan-Zeehan railway. Piers are aesthetically pleasing elements along the shoreline.

C6.1.100 Not Strahan The Not Not Description Esplanade applicable applicable applicable Megasol Products Pine Oil Distillery - West Coast Fisheries. Specific Extent Property ID 5985953 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Historically a prime industrial site of Strahan - Initially pine oil distillery site and later a crayfish and fish farm products.

C6.1.101 Not Gormanston Off Lyell Not PID 7772249 Description applicable Highway applicable (Gormanston) Iron Blow. Specific Extent Property ID 7772249

C6.1.102 Not Gormanston Lyell Highway Not Not Description applicable (East applicable applicable Queenstown) Lyell Highway and Monument opposite Iron Blow Road. Specific Extent Lat 42.07621 & Long 145.58839

C6.1.103 Not Gormanston Off Lyell Not Not Description applicable Highway applicable applicable (south side) Gormanston. Specific Extent Centroid - Lat 42.07376 & Long 145.59821

C6.1.104 Not Macquaire Macquarie Not Not Description Harbour applicable applicable Heads applicable The only entrance to Macquarie Harbour and the West Coast until the 20th Century. Specific Extent Property ID 7192666

63 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

Reference THR Town/ Street Property Folio of the Description, Specific Extent, Number Number Locality address Name Register Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values The symbolic point of arrival for the convicts sent to Sarah Island.

C6.1.105 Not Macquarie Macquarie Not Not Description Harbour applicable applicable Harbour applicable Mosquito Bay Camp. Specific Extent Part Property ID 7192666 Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance and Historic Heritage Values A traditional local holiday resort important local resource often involves single sex camps and hunting fishing parties.

C6.1.106 Not Smith’s Cove Macquarie Not Not Description Harbour applicable applicable applicable Location of the early transient Strahan settlement.

C6.1.107 Not Teepookana King River Not 137525/1 Description applicable and Mt Lyell applicable Junction Was Mt Lyell mine trans- shipment location from 1896 until closed in 1899 when trans-shipment was relocated to Regatta Point.

64 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C6.2 Local Heritage Precincts Reference Town/Locality Name of Description, Statement of Local Historic Heritage Number Precinct Significance, Historic Heritage Values and Design Criteria / Conservation Policy

C6.2.1 Queenstown Main Streets Description Local Heritage Orr and Drifield Streets Precinct Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance Rare largely intact turn of the early 20th century post and awning streetscape which exhibits to an unusual degree the frontier origins of the town and its adaptation to the prevailing climate. Contains a number of buildings notable for their fine architecture as well as rare nineteenth century timber hotels and large and small retail premises with distinctive spatial qualities and facades. Design Criteria / Conservation Policy There are no design criteria or conservation policies for this precinct.

C6.2.2 Queenstown North Description Queenstown Wilsdon Street north of Glover Creek, including Huxley Local Heritage Crescent, Jukes Crescent and Darwin Crescent. Precinct Statement of Local Historic Heritage Significance Residential precinct is a modern (1960s) equivalent of the garden suburb. General character adds uniformity of style and materials by its uniformity of scale and setting results in modern precinct in harmony with the historic town. Design Criteria / Conservation Policy There are no design criteria or conservation policies for this precinct.

WCO-Table C6.3 Local Historic Landscape Precincts Reference Town/Locality Name of Description, Statement of Local Historic Heritage Number Precinct Significance, Historic Heritage Values and Design Criteria / Conservation Policy

This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C6.4 Places or Precincts of Archaeological Potential Reference Town/Locality Property Name Folio of the Description, Specific Extent and Number / Address/ Register Archaeological Potential Name of Precinct This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

65 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C6.5 Significant Trees Reference Town/ Property Folio of the Description / Botanical Common No. of Number Locality Name and Register Specific Extent Name Name trees Street Address

This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C8.1 Scenic Protection Areas Reference Scenic Description Scenic Value Management Objectives Number Protection Area Name

This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C8.2 Scenic Road Corridors Reference Number Scenic Road Corridor Scenic Value Management Objectives Description This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Table C11.1 Coastal Inundation Hazard Bands AHD Levels Locality High Hazard Band Medium Hazard Low Hazard Band (m AHD) Defined Flood Level (m AHD) Band (m AHD) (m AHD)

Sea Level Rise 1% annual 1% annual exceedance 1% annual 2050 exceedance probability 2100 (design exceedance probability flood level) with freeboard probability 2100 2050 with freeboard

Granville Harbour 0.8 1.8 2.4 2.1

Strahan 0.7 1.9 2.5 2.2

Trial Harbour 0.8 1.8 2.4 2.1

West Coast 0.8 1.8 2.4 2.1

All other locations 0.8 1.9 2.5 2.2

66 West Coast draft Local Provisions Schedule

WCO-Applied, Adopted or Incorporated Documents

Document Title Publication Details Relevant Clause in the LPS

This table is not used in this Local Provisions Schedule

67