Clarence City Council this week approved a towering LED billboard, to be perched right next to the Tasman Highway just before the Tasman Bridge.
The monstrosity is an 8.5-metre-high, 5.9-metre-wide digital billboard — which will face traffic from the River Derwent’s eastern shore as it approaches the bridge. It was approved against the advice of professional planners, against the advice of the Department of State Growth and despite breaching planning codes.
The reasons given? An opportunity for the National Fitness Southern Recreation Association (NFSRA) which operate the Clarence and Moonah Sport Centres to generate extra revenue. A giant flashing sign, trading away Hobart’s most iconic approach view — in exchange for cash. Classy.
Let’s not gloss over the facts, this application was recommended for refusal. Council’s planning officers assessed the proposal against the Tasmanian Planning Scheme and found it:
• Incompatible with the visual landscape, particularly the mountain and city skyline from the highway approach.
• Unsafe — due to its proximity to fast-moving traffic at a critical traffic point.
• Non-compliant with several key provisions under the Signs Code.
The bridge approach has sweeping views of Kunanyi/Mount Wellington and the Hobart skyline. The planning report found the sign would “dominate and detract” from this sensitive landscape.
Even the Department of State Growth advised against it due to traffic safety risks.
Four councillors voted against the application: Beth Warren, Jade Darko, James Walker, Richard James – but the proposal had majority support from: Tony Mulder, Emma Goyne, Wendy Kennedy, Heather Chong, Allison Ritchie, Brendan Blomeley.
Sound familiar? Yes, they are the same councillors who supported building the AFL High Performance Centre in our central parks — a controversial development widely opposed by the community.
What justification did these councillors give for ignoring expert advice from State Growth and their own planning officers?
“It’ll raise money for the Sports Centre”
What is Council thinking, trading away public amenity and safety because they want to help this not-for-profit organisation raise additional revenue? Council’s function was to act as a planning authority.
“It’s not ‘defined’ a black spot, so it’s safe”
This argument is dangerously reductive. By that logic, we should wait for a fatality before acting. This is a regular accident site with “22 crashes in five years” and that’s without the distraction of a flashing billboard.
“It’s just like the Eastlands billboard”
No, it’s not. The Eastlands sign is in a 50km/h zone at a controlled intersection. The proposed site is on a 70km arterial road with frequent weaving between lanes at precisely this spot.
And, about that Billboard at Eastlands. It is not without its problems as a local recently shared: “I was waiting for the red light to change early one morning. I was on the Kangaroo Bay side, facing the billboard. It was still dark outside.
At that moment, the Peter George Ad came on the billboard. Due to the white shirt he was wearing, the screen became overwhelmingly bright. My passenger and I winced, it was like shining a torch in our eyes. Had it happened while we were driving through, the sudden glare would have completely blinded me.”
“We have discretion under the planning scheme.”
Discretionary as it is zoned Recreational. But it still must be exercised in line with the scheme’s objectives – which this proposal clearly fails. The planning officers, the Department of State Growth, and the infrastructure team all recommended refusal.
“Expert advice supported the application”
Some councillors leaned on the advice of a consultant engaged by the billboard’s proponent. But his input deserves scrutiny:
• He was not commissioned independently.
• His claims were directly contradicted by council planners and the Department of State Growth.
• He downplayed safety risks suggesting long display intervals would mitigate distraction — a claim lacking empirical support in high-speed environments.
• He minimised the visual impact on Hobart’s most iconic view corridor, despite clear evidence to the contrary.
When paid consultants contradict independent experts, the question isn’t who’s right, it’s who are they working for?
During the debate, Cr Wendy Kennedy reminded us that she supported the Eastlands digital billboard, adding the sarcastic quip “we were all told the sky was going to fall in if it happened” suggesting that public objections were irrelevant and exaggerated.
Yet, later in the meeting, Cr Kennedy passionately supported a campaign urging the public to treat councillors with more civility. Isn’t that an irony? Councillors mock legitimate community concerns, then turn around and demand respect.
Mayor Brendan Blomeley also lamented the tone of public criticism directed at councillors. But that concern rings hollow when council decisions routinely ignore expert advice, breach planning codes, and sideline community sentiment.
Respect is not a one-way street. If councillors want it, they need to earn it, by listening, by acting transparently, and by putting the public interest first.
This isn’t just about a billboard. It’s about who Clarence City Council represents — and who it doesn’t. The city’s image, its natural beauty, the safety of commuters, all sacrificed for a few extra dollars for a local sporting association.
Yes, community sport deserves support. But not like this.
This decision is emblematic of a broader trend: the ongoing marginalisation of community voices, a disregard for place and amenity, and the erosion of public trust.
This sets a terrible precedent. Cr Warren: “Does (this) mean we have to approve every other application along this strip so that we turn into the Gold Coast or Las Vegas, where we have sign after sign trying to get your attention?”
Clarence, Hobart, heck Tasmania, deserve better.
Christine Bayley is a Tasmanian community advocate and spokesperson with People Before Major Parties – Tasmania and Save Rosny Parks. She is dedicated to empowering locals and raising community voices.
Tasmanian Times (TT) is a community-based news and current affairs service covering the island state of Tasmania. It exists to provide a diverse view of Tasmanian issues. TT creates and supports independent media content utilising the best of modern technologies and tried-and-true practices of public-interest journalism.
Support us in expanding our coverage and developing new content by and for Tasmanians.
New initiatives on the way include:
- a weekly podcast covering current affairs
- a revamped website
- a monthly cartoon competition
- a user-friendly app for both Android and Apple devices
- a weekly roundup of key stories
