Tribunal overrules council on Coles Bay accommodation, vineyard proposal

The Tasmanian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (TASCAT) ruled against a 2023 decision by Glamorgan Spring Bay Council to reject a development application at 1100 Coles Bay Road, Coles Bay.

This was for eight cabins to be used as visitor accommodation, a cafe, cellar door and house, and councillors unanimously refused the proposal on multiple grounds.

Councillors said the applicants had not demonstrated the visitor accommodation was appropriate for the site, nor had they shown the development would have minimal adverse impact on the nearby Moulting Lagoon.

Key to the proposal, and its refusal, were applicants Robert and Kim Alfeldi's intention to re-establish a vineyard at the site and develop an agritourism business.

The vineyard did not require a planning permit, but meant the development had to be located in the rural zone according to Mr Alfeldi.

Representatives for the council argued against that, and claimed the proposal for accommodation would not fundamentally change without the vineyard, and as such did not need to be located in the rural zone.

TASCAT documents reported several withered grapevines and a damaged irrigation system at the site, which Mr Alfeldi said were the previous owner's attempt at establishing a vineyard.

The TASCAT panel found this did not constitute an existing agricultural use - something that would have strengthened the case put forward by the Alfeldis - as it had fallen into disuse.

Despite this, and questions over whether a vineyard would be viable, the tribunal panel sided with the proponents as the accommodation and vineyard proposal were closely interlinked.

"But for the genuine proposal to integrate the visitor accommodation with the intended vineyard it is unlikely that the proposal would satisfy the standard," they said.

"However, despite there not being a requirement to include the proposed vineyard in the development application, the proposed visitor accommodation is blended with the intended vineyard as an integrated development.

"We are satisfied that the visitor accommodation in the proposal is required to locate in a rural area for the operational reason of proximity to and support of the intended vineyard."

Similarly, the panel found the proposal would not significantly affect the use of Moulting Lagoon, nor would it be likely to have an adverse environmental impact.

As a result, the panel overturned the council's decision to refuse a planning permit and ordered the parties to agree to one with conditions attached.

The full range of conditions is yet to be determined, however during the tribunal process the Alfeldis put forward one regarding the vineyard and said they would agree to a condition that they maintain the grapevines and replant them in the event the plants die.

The TASCAT panel said this was an appropriate condition, and "should" be included in the permit.