Developers’ demands don’t trump residents’ needs, says councillor
Meander Valley councillor John Temple looks for longterm benefits to the community. Photo by Sharon Webb.
Sharon Webb
When councillors consider the more difficult planning applications, according to the Meander Valley’s Cllr John Temple, they should consider more than just the wishes of the developer.
Too often, he believes, current residents and the municipality’s future residents are left out of the equation, making for contentious, sometimes inadequate decisions.
‘Some councillors listen to the planner about an issue, whether the project fits with the rules of the planning scheme or not, and vote accordingly. ‘If that’s the way to go about making decisions, why have councillors at all?’ Cllr Temple asked.
A councillor for five years, Cllr Temple believes he has a responsibility to the current residents of an area when developments are being considered. Will it affect their lifestyles negatively? What could ameliorate that?
He also has a responsibility to the municipality’s residents of the future, who will have to live with the decisions councillors and planners make today, he believes. And often Cllr Temple is unhappy with the outcomes for both groups.
‘Subdivision often favours the shortterm gains of the developer and doesn’t consider the longterm community gains for hundreds of years to come,’ he said.
For example, the pressure to build as many houses in an area as possible, meaning houses are crowded together and fewer trees are retained.
This happened at the Prospect development by Respect Group Ltd, which runs Tyler Village and proposed a 64 home independent living estate on Westbury Road.
But in the interests of making money, they would not reduce the number of houses to 60 when neighbours in nearby Trafalgar Drive, while supporting the project, objected to removal of Respect property trees which gave them privacy.
Cllr Frank Nott, who likes the plan’s concept, said, ‘I thought it was a bit greedy. The proponents told the council meeting they weren’t prepared to lose any units in consideration of the neighbours.’
Cllr Temple said, ‘Too often it’s a dash for cash. The developers get their pot of gold and move on, leaving neighbours and future residents to live with what they’ve left behind.
‘Developers should make money but too often it’s all about maximising the profit of the developer.
‘When we consider a subdivision we agree to so many allotments for houses, but even before they are built, the allotments can be broken up for units, creating a lot more housing. It seems to me that the developer is in the driving seat and has the ability to say yes or no at all levels.’
Cllr Temple believes the starting point for development should be the longterm result for the community.
He thinks an outcome like the one at Carrick, where lots are so small that people must park on the nature strips is undesirable, no matter what the planning scheme allows.
‘This is not what people who moved there a decade ago envisaged for themselves,’ he said. ‘I’m also concerned about people who quietly sell their homes and move to another municipality because of planned subdivisions near them.
‘Do they have rights, or do councils consider only the gains of the developer?
‘It’s almost as if they are second class citizens compared with the developer.’
They also need to use their crystal balls in an attempt to foresee the future effect of developments. And here Cllr Temple refers to the proposed Hadspen Hills development.
‘Everywhere a community is divided by a major road it causes issues. How will people with prams and on mobility scooters cross Meander Valley Road to get from one side of town to the other?
‘There’s talk of a school on the Hadspen Hills side of Hadspen but we have no information about where it might go or if space is being retained.
‘At the moment the school bus stops on the side of Meander Valley Road and turns on Scott Street. As more parents bring children to the bus stop will there be tragic accidents in the future?’
Councillors’ crystal balls should also be brought out on traffic and fire issues, Cllr Temple believes.
‘Every new subdivision in Carrick, Hadspen, Westbury, Deloraine means more cars on the Bass Highway before it has fully become a dual carriage way.
‘I’d hate to see a multi-car pileup in the fog that wouldn’t have happened if this number of developments hadn’t happened at the same time.’
Residents in the Casino and Blackstone Heights areas have voiced concern about having only one way in and one way out in the case of fire.
Residents Jamie and Katrina Davies were typical of 14 residents worried about the subdivision of 68 hectares at 1 Panorama Road.
‘Our biggest concern is that if traffic flow is impeded in the event of an emergency such as a bushfire, bottlenecks at the junction of Panorama and Blackstone Roads could be potentially catastrophic,’ they said.
Cllr Temple commented, ‘It would be incredibly sad if people die in a bushfire in 50 years time because this was the cheapest way to maximise the return for the developer.’
As for the Tasmanian Planning Scheme, Cllr Temple asks, ‘Are the rules adequate? Are they effective?
‘We’re talking about the lives of people not yet born when we make development decisions.
‘I’d like to do it better, but we’re relying on Hobart bureaucrats to develop those rules. Are they effective in far-off Meander Valley?’
