Tasmanian Times

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. No price is too high for the privilege of owning yourself. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche


Crean’s approved plan faces appeal


A CONTROVERSIAL 16-lot subdivision application, proposed by former Tasmanian treasurer David Crean, near Ancanthe Park at Lenah Valley has been approved.

The decision was made by Hobart City Council’s development and environmental services director Neil Noye after the elected council could not produce a quorum to make a decision.

At the last council meeting one alderman was absent and four others declared an interest.

The council’s development and environmental services committee had recommended to the full council that the development be rejected.

This was against the recommendation of council staff who had recommended its approval.

The rocky road in the planning process for Mr Crean’s development was not only with aldermen.

A report to aldermen from council staff last month recommended refusal after the council’s senior cultural heritage officer, Brendan Lennard, recommended the application be rejected, saying the subdivision was not in keeping and would detract from the heritage-listed Lady Franklin Museum and Ancanthe Park.

But the report that went before aldermen this month recommended approval.

This was partly based on advice from the council’s senior legal adviser that the comments from Mr Lennard were inconsistent with recent decisions of the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal and therefore should not be relied on to refuse the application.

Saving Ancanthe Action Group spokesman Martin Gibson said the development’s approval would be appealed.

Full story, Mercury, HERE

Earlier on Tasmanian Times:
Leo Schofield: HCC must knock this obscene plan on the head
David Crean’s subdivision proposal sparks opposition

Mercury Thursday:

Council stuck on subdivision

CHARLES WATERHOUSE | December 29, 2011 12.00am

DAMON Thomas has backed the decisions of those aldermen on Hobart City Council who declared an interest, which led to the elected council being unable to reach a quorum to consider a controversial subdivision application near Ancanthe Park at Lenah Valley.

At the last meeting of the council one alderman was absent and four declared an interest in the 16-lot residential subdivision application by former Tasmanian treasurer David Crean.

Alderman Thomas, Hobart’s lord mayor, who has a background as a barrister and solicitor, said: “I think they considered all the advice given to them and made the decisions they made.”

Because the council had no quorum, it could not debate and vote on the residential subdivision. The decision then had to be made by the council’s development and environmental services director Neil Noye, who approved it.

Some opponents of the subdivision have questioned legal advice aldermen received, which greatly limited what they could do outside the formal planning consideration. In the past it has been common for aldermen to attend meetings, on the proposed site of developments, with opponents and developers before or after a planning application was formally lodged with the council.

Based on the recent legal advice, aldermen believe their role is far more constrained. For example, if they attend a meeting with a developer or opponents, a council officer must be present.

Opponents of the subdivision said the legal interpretation of the constraints on aldermen were ridiculous and inhibited their role to consult the community.

Ald Thomas said this was an “awfully difficult” area for councils when elected members were acting in a quasi judicial capacity and many municipal councils in Australia had developed separate protocols for this.

Charles WAterhouse’s full story, Mercury HERE

Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]


  1. James Williamson

    January 2, 2012 at 2:20 pm

    Mr Biggs..I suggest that you read the post prior to your own. You are spreading mis-information about the development. The idea that the proposed subdivision would “swamp” the Glypotek is a blatant disregard of the facts.As i stated earlier there are many houses that are closer to the Temple than the proposed development and have been built without objection in the last 20 years. If you want to honour the gift Jane Franklin gave to the people of Tasmania, you should propose that The Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery make the building an annexe, or offer it to David Walsh as a place for “installations”. Rather than having it managed by the fine arts society of Tasmania …a misnomer if ever there was one. Mr Biggs if you want to see something really ugly without any aesthetic merit, I suggest you go and have a look at some of the exhibitions that currently take place within its walls

  2. John Biggs

    January 2, 2012 at 12:48 pm

    Let us hope it is appealed. It is outrageous that a single clerk has the power to overturn an expert’s opinion like Brendan Lennard. And I am surprised (am I really?) that somebody in Crean’s position, as retired elder statesman, can push ahead with such aesthetically appalling plans like this. The development across from the LFM is simply ugly, we donlt want it swamping the museum itself. We don’t have enough open beautiful spaces, and this one, with the little museum at the centre, is screaming out for protection. And as for the “declared interest” by counsellors, what was that all about? Did they exclude themselves or were they excluded? On what grounds?

  3. James Williamson

    January 2, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    There seems to be a great deal of mis-information being spread about the proposed sub-division on David Crean’s land that is behind Jane Franklin’s Glypotek and the surrounding Ancanthe park. Letters both to the Mercury and to The Tasmanian Times are suggesting that his development will butt right up to the Temple… this isn’t the case. The land that is being proposed as a sub-division is next to the park and further away from the Museum than a lot of existing houses (mine included). And all the photographs that have been published around this debate; if they were taken after the development wouldn’t include the proposed housing. I have lived next door to Ancanthe Park for the last 19 years and in that time there have been 20 or 30 new houses built in the area , without any objections from the general public. If Tasmania wants a population with an economic “critical mass” we will need to increase the population significantly, this can’t happen without new houses being built. So I would suggest that those opponents of the development stop spreading mis-information and welcome new residents to the area.

  4. sam betts

    January 1, 2012 at 11:09 pm

    Didn’t David Crean resign from Parliament because he was ill ? Yet has made a great recovery, running the hydro and becoming a developer, wow what a champ.

  5. Robin Halton

    January 1, 2012 at 10:26 pm

    Regardless of whether the proposed Crean development clashes with Heritage, limited roading access to serve the site (encouraging further suburban enclaving in the Lenah Valley area), unsufficient fire protection distance from the Wellington Range bushland or preventing the future roading infrastructure easement that may be required to eventually facilitate a traffic Bypass behind the city linking the Southern Outlet to the Brooker Highway via the Western suburbs, the whole thing stinks of favours for mates in high places.
    I am not surprised that “most” Hobart City Aldermen are avoiding accountability not wanting to be seen offending their mates of mates associations!

  6. James Williamson

    December 27, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    I think some of those of you who are objecting to this development should take a walk outside your front door and have a look at the architectural monstrosities that you live in. The idea that its OK for me to live here but stuff anyone else who wants to reside here seems to be the prevailing attitude.I live right next door to Jane Franklin’s Glypotek in what was formerly the Lenah Valley chalet and my house which was built in the 1940s on the original land grant and if the opponents of the prospective Crean development had been around before it was built I wouldn’t have had the home where i have the happiest days of my life.

Leave a Reply

To Top