Launceston councillors VOTE against MEDICAL CENTRE
THE EXAMINER - Launceston councillors go against council recommendation for medical centre (SUNDAY, AUGUST 28, 2022)
Councillors have moved an alternative motion to the one initially recommended by City of Launceston council, refusing a development application relating to a proposed medical centre partly over concerns of increased traffic. An Elphin Road proposal was refused due to traffic issues and the detrimental impact it could have to the street's character.
The alternative motion to refuse the application carried with five for, four against and three councillors absent. Neighbours to the proposed medical centre, which would have been a consultant surgery for specialist plastic and reconstructive surgery, raised their concerns in person at the meeting. The couple had been living there for more than 30 years and one of their concerns was the vehicle movements.
With two of the three surgical consultants taking patients each day - which justified 10 rather than 12 parking spots - there would be upwards of 96 car movements a day. The couple said this was just not reasonable. They couple also stated there would be added difficulty for them to access Elphin Road.
It was councillor Tim Walker who moved the alternative motion to refuse the development application on the grounds of car parking and the impact to amenity.
"Firstly, the loss of the established garden and construction of car parking within the primary front setback is considered to have a negative visual impact on the established residential streetscape character of the surrounding areas," he said. "Secondly, the number of vehicles generated by the centre is considered too great for the established residential area."
Cr Walker said such a visual impact to the character of a residential area was not something he wanted to see. Councillors struggled between following the planning scheme and their personal feelings around the development. Councillors Hugh McKenzie, Rob Soward and Krista Preece agreed the alternative motion was "thin" but would have liked to support the motion to refuse. Cr Soward was concerned the reasoning of the alternative motion wouldn't hold up in a tribunal at the Tasmania Planning Commission.
Cr Harris said while council might lose in the tribunal, it was perhaps "worth protecting our inner residential areas". Councillors Walker, Spencer, Harris, Dawkins and Gibson voted for the amended motion, councillors McKenzie, Soward and Preece voted against while councillor Daking abstained which counted as a vote against.
LINK: https://www.examiner.com.au/story/7875777/medical-centre-development-divides-launceston-council/