Pride and compromise
I QUOTE from The Charm of Hobart, a small book by Clive Turnbull published by Ure Smith Pty Ltd, Sydney, in 1949. “When you have a great harbour and a mountain you have the place for a city of surpassing beauty; and when, in addition, you have the splendid fortune to found your city in the Georgian era all riches are added. Hobart has such richness, has it still in spite of the efforts of forward looking institutions to replace it by the latest American models. For what has to be searched for nowadays in Sydney is still plain to see in Hobart. In comely houses, nice terraces, crescents, by-ways, alleys, taverns, a theatre, the brave days persist. The natural beauty of the place is great; but if we are humanists we may even prefer what has been added by man. Here one may walk with ancestors and take one’s liquor in an inn that one’s great-grandfather used before him. In Australia that is no small privilege.” This tourist’s view of Hobart concludes: “Delightful as it would be for those of us who do not live there, it is scarcely possible to preserve Hobart unchanged as a kind of animated museum to illustrate the modes of our fathers. But it would be more regrettable if an increasing industrialisation were to sweep away the stones of the old town for chromium and glass bricks, the jukebox and the fluorescent light. Perhaps those who have pride in the place can ensure that some reasonable compromise can be reached; one hopes that they will be more successful than the sons of the pioneers of Sydney where so much of the heritage, both natural and man-made, has been wasted or spoiled. Hobart still keeps her best; there is a responsibility to see that it is preserved.” Given the architectural vandalism inflicted on our city by hotel developers and the University of Tasmania, these observations, comments and recommendations from 1949 seem to be wise and relevant advice for our present city managers. Russell Stevens Huntingfield
Only way is up
THE idea of height restrictions in the CBD — by the way it is a CBD not a parkland, with limited space so having spreading lower floors when there is no room on a site leaves going up the only alterative. Developers are spending hundreds of millions of dollars, so the only way to be profitable is to add as many floors as possible. So 45m is just holding back progress. Other Australia cities are steaming ahead, don’t hold Hobart back. Ray Langford Warrane
Be warned
BRISBANE CBD is an object lesson in how to destroy the character and soul of a city. The few remaining sandstone buildings have been dwarfed and diminished by huge towers. Roaring traffic flyovers further diminish the appeal of what once must have been a beautiful civic area. I imagine few visitors leave with fond memories of a vital civic centre or with any desire to return and locals must avoid the area unless compelled to work there. Hobart City Council is asking for comment on height limits in the city centre. Please request all heritage precincts are exempt and protected from inappropriate infill high rise development. Steven Kellett Warrane
Not practical
IT has been obvious since day one Minister Peter Gutwein’s “faster, fairer, simpler” statewide planning scheme is, in fact, just the opposite. Inevitably councils would struggle to meet the demands of their greatly increased workload and limited resources as they attempted to comply with the Government’s planning time frame. When will Mr Gutwein get the message the planning scheme he is so determined to ram through is simply not “do-able, affordable or practical”. Chris Needham Blackmans Bay
Circus
ROLL Up! If you are a developer with a completely inappropriate design idea, do we have a council for you. Clarence City Council are approving anything at the moment if there is a job or two in it or a little rates income. Size and aesthetics are irrelevant, and no public consultation entered into. Want to build on “Crown land”? No problem. Any development application will need to be lodged mid-December so the public won’t be aware of it until after Christmas holidays by which time it’s been approved. The planning scheme is so fluid there are few grounds to appeal, the cost is outside the average person’s means so no pesky appeals to worry about. But developers be quick because after the next election (state and council) the incumbents are going to be replaced with people who will act for those who elect them, not just multinational developers or foreign private companies. Clint Ayers Lindisfarne