Dust off report, hard work is done
An ideal city plan exists but is hidden in the library, says Andrew Wilkie
GATHERING dust in the state library archives is a Hobart Capital City Plan prepared by Tasmania’s first and only state architect Peter Poulet in 2010.
The Poulet plan warns that greater Hobart is more than the sum of its individual parts and that planning decisions should be made in a whole-of-city, if not a whole-of-region, manner.
“Without this, growth will continue to occur in an ad hoc, uncoordinated manner resulting in a sprawling city with poorly located and unaffordable housing, limited public transport, and increasingly, ‘big city’ problems such as traffic congestion, declining service quality and the loss of natural skylines and shorelines, all of which will impact upon residents’ quality of life,” it says.
Sound familiar? It was spot on. Today in Hobart, families live in tents, there are daily traffic snarls and development proposals threaten our natural skylines.
These are the flipsides of the boom that successive state governments should’ve seen coming. Yet years on from the Poulet report, we’re still making ad hoc decisions and still don’t have a city plan. Tasmania has returned a majority Liberal Government that’s already had four years in power. The time for excuses is over. This must now become a proactive government with a plan. Not one that waits for traffic jams and tents to be pitched before acting.
Last year I urged the Government to prepare a Hobart metropolitan strategy along the lines of the Melbourne 2030 plan to address housing affordability, urban sprawl, population growth, traffic congestion and building heights.
These challenges did not suddenly appear. They’ve been brewing for decades. They cross council boundaries and must be dealt with at the highest level. The Government’s response was that a city deal would prepare such a strategy for greater Hobart. But that’s not right. A city deal is an investment plan. But a city is more than investment. A broader wholeof-city, metropolitan strategy would set economic, social and environmental outcomes and a map to get there.
Since then I’ve discovered the mothballed Poulet plan. The hard work’s been done. Tasmania had a state architect before the Liberals axed the position. Peter Poulet, now the Government Architect for NSW, filled the role and he and the Tasmanian Planning Commission prepared a Hobart Capital City Plan. The steering committee comprised the Hobart, Glenorchy and Clarence councils and most government departments and Southern Water.
The plan was released for public comment and finalised but for some reason never saw the light of day. The state planning unit told my office it will be integrated into the Southern Tasmanian Regional Land Use Strategy at its next review. Until then it sits in the library archives, its warnings unheeded.
The Hobart Capital City Plan drew from the land use strategy, Sullivans Cove Master Plan and Gehl Report. The latter was by Jan Gehl, the world-class Danish urban planner behind Melbourne’s laneway rejuvenation.
Years later, it’s interesting to revisit his observations. “Nature has blessed Hobart with a unique setting with hills, nature reserves and the sea close to the city. Few cities can ask for more,” Gehl enthused. He was less impressed with the city centre’s “character of a shopping mall” and the “severe auto invasion”. He recommended reducing city traffic with more emphasis on walking, cycling and public transport.
To be fair, the Hobart City Council and governments have acted on some of Gehl’s
ideas. Cruise ships are greeted with much improved facilities, Princes Wharf No. 1 is no longer a carpark, laneways are coming to life, pavements have been widened and the council is improving links to Queens Domain.
High-rise development wasn’t proposed when Gehl wrote his report but I expect he would join me in opposing skyscrapers here. “Hobart has almost managed to keep a gentle, low skyline, which is fortunate given the wind problems high-rise buildings would have caused in any city in this location,” Gehl wrote, lamenting that so many of Hobart’s beautiful water views were blocked by the few highrise buildings on the harbour.
Hobart is on the cusp of something new. Investment and interest in the city are at an all-time high. Let’s dust off the Hobart Capital City Plan 2011-2040, bring it up to date, and make the most of these opportunities while retaining what is fabulous about this city. Recently in these pages the Planning Institute of Australia also called for the Government to legislate for a Hobart metropolitan plan. There is a strong case for resurrecting a state architect to oversee the work. It’s a small investment that would pay great dividends.
Building heights, housing affordability, the cable car, Macquarie Point, light rail, public transport, the University of Tasmania expansion into the city, and traffic congestion are topics at Hobart dinner tables. We have to stop dealing with these in isolation. Instead we must have an overarching strategy to encourage investment, and ensure Hobart retains its heritage, amenity and liveability.
Hobart is on the cusp of something new. Investment and interest are at an all-time high. Let’s dust off the Hobart Capital City Plan, bring it up to date, and make the most of these opportunities