Who has final say on buildings?

HIGH-RISE DEVELOPMENT

WHEN the development applications for Fragrance Group’s skyscrapers are released to the public, the official period for public comment will start. Before that happens, it’s important the community can be certain who the final decisionmaker will be. The State Government should confirm its proposed Major Projects Legislation will not be used to override Hobart City Council if the council decides to not approve the skyscraper proposals. Planning Minister Mr Gutwein ( Mercury, August 10) says the new legislation “would not be about fast-tracking these sorts of skyscrapers”. The question remains whether the State Government intends to use its legislation to approve high-rise buildings that don’t meet the planning rules for Hobart’s historic waterfront. The precedent of the Cable Car Facilitation Bill shows the preparedness of the State Government to intervene in development decisions. We need a guarantee from the Planning Minister that the council will not be sidestepped if the skyscraper developers don’t get what they want. rise character. We can still see our lovely mountain and unique Derwent. We do not want “look at me” edifices to be overshadowing. Planning authorities, please note that the use of “discretion” to bypass planning regulations and foist on to the citizens of Hobart trashy oversized towers will never be forgiven.

Tall and thin no better

I COULD not believe my eyes when I saw the statement by Peter Scott, of Xsquared Architects, that “A taller and narrower version ... will have less environmental impact than the shorter version ( Mercury, August 8).” How does he think the acceptable solutions for height in the Sullivans Cove Planning Scheme (created to protect the area from buildings such as the Grand Chancellor which is 42m high) can be ignored by saying “less environmental impact”. The acceptable solutions height in Collins St is 15m. Xsquared wants to stretch this to 84m (94m to the tip of the spire). The acceptable solutions height in Davey St is 18m and Xsquared wants us to accept a height of 179m (204m to spire tip), although others say it is actually 186m with 211m to spire tip. This skyscraper is going to be extremely visible from many areas of Hobart, not just standing at the bottom looking up. I was also very interested to see a photo montage. It shows so much reflection on the tower that it looks like the invisible man and is also created from an angle that could only be viewed from up in the air. We need to be aware that, as with so many other developers, these people may be asking for the sky (literally) with the intention of making us thankful when A new way to have your say themercury.com.au readers have a new way to have their say. It’s free to use, just register and have your say. For more details and to register, visit the website. they later reduce the height a bit (but still way above the acceptable solution height). I think a few more people would be joining Simon Currant in front of the bulldozers if that happened. It was very pleasing to see the Tourism Industry Council Tasmania finally come out with a statement opposing the height of these two skyscrapers.

Tough for developers

AND so the citizenry rejoice. “High rise is dead. Long live low Hobart”. Whilst the Fragrance Group’s proposed skyscraper may be on the nose, I sympathise with any developer that needs to run the gauntlet of Hobartian public opinion to get projects approved. Unless you have the Midas-like persuasive qualities of a David Walsh, you’re in for a tough time. Perhaps an alternative approach to the planning process may not be to say where skyscrapers can’t go, after developers have spent millions of dollars on architect and planning fees, but rather designate areas where, within reason, almost anything can go. An architectural free-for-all zone, out of sight of “old Hobart”. Fortunately, Hobart is geographically blessed with physical partitions that could hide the old from the new cities. Mt Rumney to the east could hide a new city along the Acton corridor adjacent to the airport, with Seven Mile Beach new Tasmania’s Gold Coast. As well as highrise hotels, new Hobart could include high-density and lower-cost housing to help address our rental affordability crisis. A win-win for all that deserves to be included in any strategic plan for Hobart.

Well said

CONGRATULATIONS to Sam Watson ( Mercury, August 24) on a well-researched, moderate and unanswerable article on the case for relevant marriage laws.

Deer question

SO the mass slaughter of deer is “part of the Tasmanian culture” … something like the Dark Mofo bull. Tasmania has much to be proud of indeed. A culture of killing and senseless slaughter. Don’t we kill enough animals already without killing these gentle, captivating, graceful animals for fun? Our tourists must be so impressed.

Long wait

WE all wait for the so-called developments of the cable car, light rail and Mona upgrade. The same as waiting for Will to announce an election date so we can move on for the better.

Not core business

WHY would the HCC become involved in something that is not in any way council-related by flying the current flag. To raise this issue is probably outside the council’s guidelines. It should stay with the three Rs — roads, rats and rates.