From: Sent: 15 Nov 2020 11:05:27 +1100 To: Planning @ Meander Valley Council Subject: representation - blackstone heights SAP Attachments: Blackstone Heights Development Meander Valley Council submission Nov 2020.pdf HI Council Sorry, I meant to send PDF version. Kind Regards George Pitt Meander Valley Council Ordinary Meeting Agenda - 19 January 2021 Page 249 Document Set ID: 1383554 Version: 1, Version Date: 16/11/2020 George and Amanda Pitt – Representation to MVC November 2020 Proposed Blackstone Heights SAP Introduction This representation is made in regards to the proposed re-zoning contained in the Blackstone Heights SAP. It is the authors view that the proposed development is in conflict with the Schedule 1 objectives of the Resource Management and Planning System of Tasmania. The development impacts negatively on the people and communities and does not provide for or maintain their current level of social, economic and cultural well-being and for their health and safety. Blackstone Heights is significantly, a low density housing community. People invest and live in this area for the amenity that is provided by that zoning. This is not a zoning that was forced on the community, residents made the free choice to live here. The proposed zoning change alters that and will have long lasting impacts on the social, economic and environmental amenity of residents. The proposal supporting the application for the creation of the Blackstone Heights Specific Area Plan is flawed and does not support the requirements that the proposed amendment must: • Seek to further the objectives set out in Schedule 1 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993; • Have regard to the strategic plan of a council referred to in Division 2 of Part 7 of the Local Government Act 1993 as adopted by the council at the time the planning scheme is prepared; • As far as practicable, avoids the potential for land use conflicts with use and development permissible under the planning scheme applying to the adjacent area; • Have regard to the impact that the use and development permissible under the amendment will have on the use and development of the region as an entity in environmental, economic and social terms; • Is consistent with the regional land use strategy, if any, for the regional area in which is situated the land to which the scheme applies; and • Is in accordance with State Policies made under section 11 of the State Policies and Projects Act 1993 There are significant omissions in the information provided and omissions resulting in key impacts not identified or assessed in the proposal at all. The proposal relies on inaccurate or incomplete data to discount the impact of the development in relation to traffic movements and flora and fauna including endangered species. The proposal seeks to reduce the opportunity for the community to voice its opinion by changing the approval process of different activities making it far easier for developers to choose to do things which impact unreasonably on residents. The proposal seeks to represent the community with commentary that the development is going to be for the betterment of the community, yet the proposal creates the type of high density housing that most residents have chosen not to live in and the community have specifically indicated that they want the area developments to reflect the current “feel” of the area. Meander Valley Council Ordinary Meeting Agenda - 19 January 2021 Page 250 George and Amanda Pitt – Representation to MVC November 2020 Proposed Blackstone Heights SAP More importantly, the proposal will significantly impact the amenity (environmental, social and economic) of the area through: - Reduction in house values for those residents living directly alongside the proposed area to be rezoned. - Increased levels of noise - Increased traffic of significant volumes that will create delays, congestion and safety related issues through the one access road to the community - Loss of visual amenity by building across the skyline - Increased levels of light - Reduced bushfire evacuation capacity - Impacting on the native flora and fauna, including clearing sections of bush - The development of high density housing (doubling the size of the community) with no increase in public open space such as playgrounds, sporting fields or parks. - Creating a land use conflict with the neighbouring zone with high density housing placed directly against the boundaries of low density housing blocks. The construction of the development will take years, exposing nearby residents to ongoing construction works which if not controlled or limited will destroy the quiet and peaceful aspect of the area, especially given the nature of the terrain over which the development is to occur. The proposal contains elements that are designed to make the proposal appeal to people – it has its own sewerage treatment works, its own electricity grid with solar panels built into the roofs and talks about open space (which remains in private hands). These aspects are irrelevant in considering the proposed re-zoning of the developer is not legally required to abide by them. Once the area is re-zoned, the developer will be able to alter any proposed plans. The developer has already shown a set of plans different to the ones submitted in support of this proposal. If this the case, then the proposal is simply for high density housing in a low density housing area. This is a significant risk and exposes the community to high density residential development across all the land. I also highlight the inadequacy of the council in assessing this proposal and question why the underlying data has not been challenged. The council do not appear to be effectively assessing the total volume of traffic that is planned to use Blackstone Road, Pitcher Parade and Country Club Avenue resulting from all developments in Blackstone Heights and surrounding areas (including Federal Hotels development). Residents along the key access routes impacted are not been notified by council and provided the opportunity to voice their concerns. The council also seem to be ignoring many of the requirements of the MVC planning scheme and Structure Plan and should not have endorsed it. The Members of the TPC are invited to visit the area to gain a greater understanding of the nature of the area in regards to noise, traffic and amenity that residents currently enjoy. This re-zoning application should be rejected. Meander Valley Council Ordinary Meeting Agenda - 19 January 2021 Page 251 George and Amanda Pitt – Representation to MVC November 2020 Proposed Blackstone Heights SAP Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 The land Use Planning and Approvals Act requires the planning authority must be satisfied that such a draft amendment of an LPS will meet the LPS criteria. 38. Decision in relation to request (1) A planning authority, before deciding whether to prepare a draft amendment of an LPS in relation to a municipal area in accordance with a request under section 37(1) , must be satisfied that such a draft amendment of an LPS will meet the LPS criteria. (2) A planning authority, within 42 days after receiving a request under section 37(1) or a longer period allowed by the Commission, must – (a) decide to agree to the amendment and prepare a draft amendment of the LPS; or (b) decide to refuse to prepare the draft amendment of the LPS. (3) A planning authority, within 7 days of deciding under subsection (2) whether or not to prepare a draft amendment of an LPS in accordance with a request under section 37(1) , must give notice of the decision to the person who made the request. It is my view that the planning authority – the MVC, have not: • undertaken due diligence on the information presented to them to effectively assess the impact of the proposal • sufficiently identified the conflicts contained in the proposal with the planning scheme and taken measures to explain or understand them and therefore, cannot demonstrate that the proposed amendment will meet the LPS criteria. Information supporting this argument is presented in this document. Meander Valley Council Ordinary Meeting Agenda - 19 January 2021 Page 252 George and Amanda Pitt – Representation to MVC November 2020 Proposed Blackstone Heights SAP Planning/Change in use/Development The proposal will change the approval process for what can occur in the SAP as compared to what currently is permitted, or the assessment process it is required to go through. The following are a list of some of those developments for which change is prescribed. • Visitor accomodation • Single dwellings • Multiple dwellings • Resource processing • Research and development These changes will either be in conflict with the current zoning adjacent to the proposed development or enable the development of structures that are in conflict as it takes away the opportunity for input by the community. The changes to approval processes for different developments should not be altered as part of the re-zoning as they are in direct conflict with current zoning regulations. The developer is not bound by the current plan and as a result, if the changes were permitted, leaves existing residents with a high risk of developments occurring that are not compatible with the adjacent or current zoning. The Structure Plan for this area states: There are a number of existing local and regional strategic planning documents that provide direction for land use and development in Prospect Vale and Blackstone Heights. The key strategic land use