If you read the Examiner an get the feeling that the decision making is done and dusted then you are excused.
If the Council is under fire it is because it appears as if the planners at Town Hall have been running on HUBRIS JUICE yet again. Whoever it is who is filling their tanks with this stuff is anybody's guess but it is unlikely that you'll need to leave Town Hall to tap them on the shoulder.
With General Managers having, and so very often exploiting, extraordinary and unusual executive powers under the Local Govt Act, detecting hubristic and preemptive 'authority' in the air doesn't require clairvoyance at any level – the trickle-down-effect is measurable.
Reading The Examiner there is no hint of any giving way to community concerns let alone any hint of concern in regard to the layers of bureaucratic stuff-ups that preceded the 'representors' meeting'. However, that is up to 'the elected 12' if they are not nobbled.
Speculating upon what might be influencing the decision making before hand, on the day and potentially at the appeal if things go that far, would be a risky business. Then there is the spectre of declaring of 'design excellence' on the part of the dilettantes about town. Click here to read some press commentary on this.
When money is involved 'excellence' is typically assessed subjectively and the criteria is likewise elastic. Throw in a bit of 'executive power' and goodness knows what will win what on the day.
However, if say the General Manager under SECTION 65 is to "guarantee expertise" and by extension 'design excellence', too it now seems. Will he call on the Architect's Institute for help? Or will it it be some in-house panel ably assisted by some 'captain's picks' from the Chamber of Commerce, the museum and say a councillor or two with a 'design bent'?
Indeed, in the criteria will such things as appropriate technology, ecological sustainability, energy self-sufficiency, water management, durability, fitness-for-purpose, place relevance, site specificity get any consideration or ranking? Of course the proponents will have their priorities and business expectations but large projects make enormous impacts upon placescaping and community wellbeing.
It's all a bit hard isn't it?
T.Alen
NB At the time this post was made this site has had 87K plus readers
City of Launceston council has come under fire again by representors against the proposed Gorge Hotel, following a meeting between the two parties.
At the meeting on Thursday, more than half of the representors attended. The attendees had submitted representations against the hotel.
However, general manager Michael Stretton said the council routinely hosts representor meetings prior to a development application going before the councillors for a decision.
Ratepayer Ian Routley said after more than two-and-a-half hours, the representors moved a motion criticising the council's actions during the advertising period and expressed no confidence in the ability of the council to completely asses development applications.
However, the motion was not regarded as official, because it was not the forum for those types of issues, Mr Stretton said.
RELATED STORIES:
- Gorge Hotel application lodged with council
- Hotel readvertised after council miss title
- Gorge Hotel to be readvertised for third time after council mistake
- Gorge Hotel created by six architects
"They are not a forum for the passing of resolutions and or the making of decisions," he said.
"The council is not required to hold the meetings and only does so because we believe that they add value to the process from both an officer and a representor perspective."
Nearly 40 representations were received about the hotel proposal, with all of the representors who submitted invited to the meeting.
The development proposal has now been finalised for assessment, with the councillors set to discuss the application at its meeting on Thursday.
Of the representations, three were supportive of the development, and 35 raised concerns.
However, the development is recommended for approval by council staff.
In the meeting's agenda, the representors' concerns are outlined, with seismic risk, design, height, heritage, lack of community consultation and noise all listed.
The $50-million hotel would have 145 rooms, a 500-people conference centre, 200-seat bar and restaurant, function rooms, rooftop cocktail bar, day spa and a gym.
It is being put forward by Josef Chromy's JAC Group.
The council's development services director Leanne Hurst said in the agenda: "subject to the recommended conditions, the project complies with the planning scheme and is appropriate to be recommended for approval."
Councillors will vote on the proposal at a meeting on Thursday. It will be held at 1pm at the Town Hall.
No comments:
Post a Comment