It comes after a council decision in May to initiate amendment 66 and provide a specific area plan for the proposed site.

With the approval of the plan, the Tasmanian Planning Commission now will review the 61 public submissions and consult with developers to decide the JAC Group hotel's fate.

READ MORE: Ice-affected driver caused fatal highway crash

If the proposed development progresses to a development application, the DA will be put to council at a later date.

The proposed luxury hotel has been a contentious issue for the City of Launceston council for more than two years, with the hotel originally approved in 2019.

However, an appeal was subsequently lodged by neighbouring restaurateur Susie Cai who received support from Launceston Heritage Not Highrise.

At the time, Ms Cai claimed the proposed 39-metre hotel would overshadow her unit, blocking all natural light.

In November 2019, RMPAT found the overshadowing was not an issue but upheld the appeal on height and compatibility grounds.

At Thursday's meeting, councillor Tim Walker voted against the SAP and attempted to move numerous motions against the plan.

READ MORE: This is what a heart attack feels like, survivor shares her story

Cr Walker cited the proposed maximum height limit was not in keeping with surrounding buildings.

Additionally, Cr Walker believed the visual impact of the building would be detrimental to residents of West Launceston.

Cr Krista Preece also chose to vote against the SAP, citing the height restrictions as a cause for concern.

While height also remained a concern for Cr Paul Spencer, the potential increase for jobs for locals was a significant factor in his decision making before casting a vote.

"I'm a tradie," he said.

"And for local tradies, tourism and jobs I probably will support it.

"But it's a hard one because of the height, but for the tradies of Launceston, I probably will support it."

Cr Andrea Dawkins voted in favour of the SAP but acknowledged the whole process had been "quite messy".

READ MORE: Jobs still falling as tourism sector sweats on summer reopening

Cr Dawkins said she believed that if the process had begun with a SAP in 2019, the situation may have resulted in less controversy and a more positive response from the Launceston community.

"Unfortunately, we didn't hear back from more than one person [in the public submissions] on how they feel positively about the development," she said

"But does that mean the community doesn't feel positively about development in this space? I don't think so."

"It would be good to hear from a wider range of people in our community."

She said the proposed site was the best possible location for a significant development in Launceston.

"It's wedged in tricky spot, there's a lot of traffic and the corner itself needs to change, there's no doubt about that," she said.

Whilst Cr Dawkins acknowledged Cr Walker's passion for the subject, she was not impressed by his attempts to motion against the plan during the meeting.

"I feel like we've been railroaded by Cr Walker today," she said.

"And I don't appreciate that."

Council regulations meant that Cr Walker could not motion against the SAP but could continue to oppose the development at later stages.

Whilst the decision signalled another step towards the completion of The Gorge Hotel, Cr Dawkins conceded that the process would still take time to come to fruition.

"We are a ways away from that," she said

"We are stuck in the middle of this process and we need to see what happens next."

On the JAC Group website, the proposed hotel is described as "an exciting proposal for a new tourist development in Launceston.

The project offers magnificent waterfront views with up to 160 rooms, 500-plus delegate conference centre, restaurant, gym and day spa.

Located on the edge of the CBD, Penny Royal and Cataract Gorge, guests will have stunning views from their rooms."

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

What do you think? Send us a letter to the editor: