During the most recent City of Launceston meeting, general manager Michael Stretton urged aldermen to make a majority decision on a development application for the property on Binalong Avenue, St Leonards.

“A six-six vote is a non-decision on the planning application … it would be considered a deemed approval and the applicant can apply to the tribunal to determine and add conditions,” he said.

However, aldermen failed to find make a majority determination within the statutory time frame of 42 days.

Mr Stretton said under section 59 of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act the property owner could now seek guidance from the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal.

The property owner had sought the council’s permission to demolish an existing garage, which is accessed internally, and build a larger structure with the doors to be used directly via a new, double crossover from Binalong Avenue. 

City of Launceston planning officers recommended that the council refuse the request because it was “considered that the garage is not compatible with the existing garages in the street and that it detracts from the character of the surrounding area due to its visual impact, size and location”.

Concerns were also raised during the debate about how the development could affect the progress of the St Leonards Village Plan.

Alderman Robin McKendrick said the property owner had a number of “old cars” and simply wanted a place to store them. He said the vehicles would not be moving in and out on a regular basis, and there was no reason to deny the application.

IN OTHER NEWS:

Alderman McKendrick also outlined that there had been no representations against the development.

“The cul-de-sac as it is now has existed for the last 30 to 40 years, it may sometime in the future be opened up, but you can’t make judgements on an if, a but and a may,” he said. 

Alderman Ted Sands, Hugh McKenzie, Jim Cox, Darren Alexander and Simon Wood agreed, voting in favour of the development.

While aldermen Albert van Zetten, Rob Soward, Danny Gibson, Janie Finlay, Emma Williams and Karina Stojansek voted to refuse the proposal.

Alderman Finlay said the property would have a life beyond the current owner and applications must be assessed on the merits of the planning scheme. 

“We are required and have the responsibility to make quality planning decisions and it’s rare for our officers to recommend refusal,” Alderman Finlay said.