Retired doctor Scott Bell painted a rainbow on his East Launceston street to give it a bit of colour and nearby residents a sense of hope as Tasmania begins to emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
However days later the Launceston City Council removed it, despite Dr Bell offering to remove it himself if LCC wished.
Dr Bell surveyed his neighbours, who he said were all in favour but one, who said he should contact the council.
After the survey, himself and some neighbours painted the rainbow on Adelaide Street and the next day he asked the council for it to be retrospectively allowed.
He said he understood the council had regulations and required them, but he wanted it to be flexible given the circumstances.
"I chose a rainbow motif for a variety of reasons, but specifically because it has come to symbolise, in the post COVID-19 recovery phase, an indication of joy, hope, growth and positivity," he said.
"What was something that should have been fun, which was approved by the local community, and was inoffensive and created some happiness for people who saw it, turned into a legal head butting stoush.
"The number of people since then have said, 'oh where has the rainbow gone? It was a lovely thing'. A lot of them said ... what a waste of council money getting rid of something we all like looking at."
IN OTHER NEWS:
The council's chief executive Michael Stretton said the council was a supporter of public art and was eager to see designated street art areas like those at Royal Park expanded.
"When it comes to artworks on public infrastructure, members of the public need to talk to us before taking matters into their own hands," he said.
"The council's door is always open to anyone who wishes to discuss potential public art projects for the city in good faith. However, it's never appropriate to work on public infrastructure without approval and on roads in particular."
Mr Stretton said people working without authorisation on roadways potentially put themselves and other road users at risk and created clean up costs for ratepayers.
"Household products like spray paint do not meet public infrastructure standards," he said.
"They can make road surfaces slippery in wet weather, creating a hazard for motorists and pedestrians, and disperse chemicals into our waterways."
Dr Bell was given a warning and told he needed to contact the council before a public art project.
He rebutted the council's claims it was a slip hazard and asked to formally get approval to repaint it. However he was told by the council it did not support 'public art on road surfaces'.
"It was an inoffensive expression of joy and the council could not even see it was something worthwhile leaving there," Dr Bell said.
"I guess they could say 'look we can't set a precedent, we'll be opening the flood gates, there will be street art everywhere', well whoopee."
What do you think? Send us a letter to the editor: