Talking Point: The interest generated by the proponent for Welcome Stranger proposal won’t affect decision

HELEN BURNET: The barrage of advertising by the Welcome Stranger hotel proponent will not affect the decision

An artist impression of the proposed Welcome Stranger development from St David's Park.

There is nothing extraordinary about tonight’s Hobart Council meeting. As with hundreds of meetings before and as other councils do across the state, during the meeting, we’ll be acting as a planning authority making decisions on development applications.

What is extraordinary is the frenzied lead up to agenda item 9.5, the Welcome Stranger application. Committee recommendation based on the officer’s report is to refuse the development. However, the applicant’s promoter is doing his best to pick out of the report another story.

The application generated over 800 representations from the public. This public interest in itself is not unusual with the current concern of building heights, heritage and housing affordability. The Welcome Stranger has also generated a significant amount of media attention: a number of articles, TV and radio interviews, a press conference by the developer, the subject of this paper’s Wednesday editorial, a full page ad in Friday’s Mercury, and even a Media Reach poll conducted for the proponent.

Perhaps the promoter should take stock of how much his client’s money he is spending: this media hype has nothing to do with the decision-making we as a planning authority undertake.

To put it into focus, this is what the elected representatives will be basing our decisions on:

There were 883 public written representations with 800 against. These were received during the statutory time for public comment, while many others for and against have been sent directly to elected representatives and are still arriving in inboxes.

WHY COUNCIL OFFICERS REJECTED WELCOME STRANGER PROJECT

The Urban Design Advisory Panel’s advice on impacts in the Heritage Code had been provided to the applicant twice, and their concerns were noted in the final committee report.

The 659-page report by qualified officers and professionals was discussed in detail by the Planning Committee last Monday. The seven elected representatives present heard the applicant and the public put forward their cases, and then responses from the Council’s planners. After 90 minutes of discussion and after considering officer’s advice, having visited the site, hearing from representors and the applicant’s experts too, the recommendation to Council followed the officer’s advice to refuse the application. The committee was divided with two members voting against the decision.

SEE THE DESIGNS: PUB TO WELCOME EMPTY NESTERS

Now the full Council will decide, hearing arguments based on the relevant planning codes, zones and discretions.

The issues of how much housing this development might provide, the promise of retiring electronic gaming machines, or what people might think of infill housing is irrelevant to tonight’s decision when considering this as a planning authority. It should be clear that the Council is taking the issue of homelessness seriously with other action, including through planning measures, as this paper has covered.

DEVELOPER TAKES AIM AT COUNCIL AFTER REJECTION

There is no doubt that the community is passionate about building heights, finding solutions to the issues of housing and homelessness, promoting Hobart’s values articulated in the Community Vision, at the same time as growing. Trying to sway public or elected representatives’ opinion with an expensive PR campaign is an extraordinary way of tackling the Planning Scheme.

Helen Burnet is the Deputy Lord Mayor of Hobart and the Chair of the City Planning Committee.