Council 'sympathetic' to subdivision concerns, but no reason to reject

A proposal to build a second house at 23 Beverley Hills Road - assessed as broadly compliant with planning laws - was unanimously endorsed by City of Launceston councillors.

Three neighbours raised concerns with the council over a lack of parking in the cul-de-sac and increased density of houses as there were other multiple-dwelling developments proposed in the street.

The original lot measures 1246 square metres, and when split it would have a a site density of one home per 623 square metres.

This surpasses the minimum requirement of one home per 325 square metres, as set out in local planning laws.

The only issue that did not meet planning requirements, and was instead assessed against performance criteria, was how much the new house would overshadow its neighbours.

Speaking in favour of the development, deputy mayor Hugh McKenzie said although he initially had concerns given the road was a cul-de-sac he thought the new house would be a good fit for the neighbourhood.

"This is actually quite a good multiple dwelling," Cr McKenzie said.

"We usually think about it in the way of units, this is actually a house and I think it actually fits quite nicely into the streetscape."

Councillor Tim Walker also spoke on the matter, and said he would deviate from his self-professed record of voting against suburban multiple dwelling developments.

He said the Beverley Hills Road proposal was "not perfect" and he was "sympathetic" to the concerns raised, but as far as he could tell it would not substantially impact the neighbourhood.

"Certainly it is the case that people can reasonably think that when they buy into an area of single dwelling properties they might reasonably expect that it would stay that way," Cr Walker said.

"But it is true that with the changing nature of society, there is more demand for properties in the urban area.

"This is one way that people find to address that issue. I'm not saying that completely mitigates their concerns, because it's true when you buy property in a street ... it's reasonable to expect that that shouldn't change a lot.

"I suppose my point there is I don't think it is actually changing a lot."