On June 21, after 35 minutes of my valuable time, no car spaces available so I drove until I found an empty space eventually in Elizabeth Street. I paid my $2.20 for an hour metered parking, then paid $6 for a taxi to return me to LGH. My visiting time now cut short. I paid another $6 for my taxi fare to return me to my car. In total $14.20 and less than half an hour visiting time to see my father.

In the multi-storey car park there were at least eight parking bays empty and all displaying the sign Permit Holders Only. When there are so many people looking for cars spaces why are these bays empty? Not just this day - on many of the days that I have been looking for parking spaces. Come on LGH - surely you should be able to cater for the public a little better than this.

IT IS indefensible and so wrong for the media to either publish, comment or criticise heritage advocates who have both a role and a right to question development proposals that fall under heritage legislation. Developers have a responsibility to comply with Tasmanian planning legislation as does any other property owner.

Prior to lodgement of the first CH Smith development application heritage advocates were proactive acting both professionally and responsibly with the objective of upholding the earlier heritage conditions that on five occasions were upheld by the Resource Management Planning Appeals Tribunal. The second application in respect to the site was due to significant changes to parking provisions that was beneficial to the development. In recent months the local media’s incitement of hatred and incomplete reporting has led to much hurt, as often they did not attempt to verify facts/truth.