A motion to look into building heights on the city's fringe has been knocked back by the City of Launceston council after it only got two votes of support.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Councillor Tim Walker submitted the motion to look into a special precinct area that could allow tall buildings. Cr Walker said an area just on the fringe of the city would allow the central business district's heritage to be preserved and allow development for tall buildings that is still close to the city.
Despite the motion asking the council to consider developing a SAP to accommodate current height restrictions, Cr Walker said it was not just a motion about building heights.
"Not once in the motion does it mention building height. That is done purposely because this is about exceeding the planning scheme, whether it be provisions to do with flood plains, whether it's do with heights, with setbacks whatever it may be," he said.
IN OTHER NEWS:
Cr Walker said the motion would allow the council's planners to actually plan for the city, and "not just always be compliance officers".
"It's asking our urban planners to do exactly what they're trained to do and that's make our city more liveable."
Cr Walker and councillor Paul Spencer were the only two people to vote for the motion.
Cr Spencer said the motion was a great idea because the council needs to find alternatives to where tall buildings can be constructed.
RELATED STORIES:
Other councillors agreed that the Paul Davies building heights and massing study was already somewhat looking into this issue. Councillor Rob Soward said the motion should be returned to the council if Cr Walker's concerns are not addressed by the next report.
Councillor Janie Finlay said predetermining areas limited ideas.
"Without limits some super exciting things could happen," she said.
Councillor Nick Daking agreed saying it is not known what future developers could create.
"Let's not restrict them before they do," he said.
Councillor Andrea Dawkins said the motion was too narrow.
Councillor Hugh McKenzie was not at the meeting.
HAVE YOUR SAY: