Report comment

In Launceston TAS on “Visitor Accommodation, Food...” at 116-128 Cimitiere Street Launceston TAS 7250:

Katrina Hill commented

I am writing as I have several concerns about the Hotel Development proposed for the Cimitiere/Tamar/William St site in Launceston, DA0506/2019 (other being advertised when people are preoccupied with a pandemic!) however I am not opposed to it (and I appreciate the adaptive reuse proposed and the architectural aesthetic).

1. With continued conflict/discussion about an absolute height limit in Launceston no applications should be making statements that they comply . Or that they are 'fitting in' with the character of the city. It could be misconstrued that an outcome (on absolute height limits) is being withheld to benefit developers rather than protect the city and its character.

Also. Using "absolute" building heights (of existing structures) which include spires and towers (which are decorative and not of any mass) implies that this interesting and delicate skyline character can be added to by this new hotel. The telecommunication tower never went through any approval process and had three top floors added later when they failed to demolish a adjacent heritage building. It was never intended to be that tall. The things that were done to destroy the heritage and character of the city in the 70's and 80's are well remembered. And the Gorge hotel was knocked back (so should not be used for comparison)

2. Pedestrianization about vehicle movements (my major concern).

The footpaths along Cimitiere and Tamar are EXCEEDINGLY shallow (and thin) and have no street furniture to stop people making entry onto a very active set of roads. Cimitiere St. is a transport corridor and will have heavy vehicles operating (which tourists may not be aware of).

In particular, the conference centre would likely see MANY people enter/exit within a short period of time (where visitor accommodation would not) which could easily see spill over onto the road. (Also, please note, as someone who has navigated the inner-city space at night cars are not necessarily within the speed limit in the CBD).

This needs to be addressed BEFORE development starts not after and the rate payers of Launceston should not have to pay for it.

3. Parking and traffic (the biggest issue for the community and developers)

The CBD parking exemption code was never intended to apply to such a HUGE hotel. To say "no parking in required" is silly. People must park somewhere. Tasmania in general has a poor public transport system and car rentals, for Northern Tasmania, are quite high (by design).

Making a statement about arrivals i.e. "some will arrive by taxi" is not evidenced based. No indication is given of percentages of people who currently arrive in which mode to the Grand Chancellor or the Casino (for example) which would be good examples. This information would be good to have.

Hobart and Launceston operate VERY differently. Hobart hotels as 'assessed against' examples (height, car parking, transport modes and traffic movements) is not reflective of Launceston behaviours. There are accommodation entities and conference spaces in Launceston and they could be assessed against.


The intended road system changes by State Government and the University of Tasmania inner-city relocation (including their car parking) are not inconsiderable and will alter the current operations in that area. Utas has had a lot of trouble working out traffic solutions and they will not be wanting tourists parking in car parks (close to the campus) intended for their students after such a difficult and long process to find a solution (do not assume students will cycle, walk and come by much as this will be encouraged and prefered).

Thank you for your time.

sent to the planning authority

This form is for reporting comments that should be removed. Reasons can include that the comment is spam, abusive, unlawful or harassing — in other words, where people are going out of their way to cause harm. Please explain clearly why you think the comment should be removed.

This week

Find PlanningAlerts useful?

This independent project is run by a local charity, the OpenAustralia Foundation. PlanningAlerts is powered by small, tax-deductible donations from the people who use it to stay informed about changes to their local area. If you find it useful, chip in to support PlanningAlerts.

Back PlanningAlerts