Lionel Morrell's submission to Launceston City Council, Public Meeting 21 June 2016

Submission to Launceston City Council, Public Meeting 21 June 2016 - Proposed gift of land, formerly the Old Velodrome Track Site at Inveresk (Site 1), and formerly the Old Goods Rail Depot Willis Street (Site 2) Launceston.

As President of the Ratepayers Association, President of the Heritage Protection Society and as an architect in private practice in Tasmania, Ratepayer and long-term resident of this City, I oppose the principle of LCC ratepayers gifting the above parcels of land to the University of Tasmania as they have requested for construction of university facilities because
  • this land is presently utilised for income producing purposes for the benefit of  effectively defraying the Launceston rate burden. Site 1 is regularly utilised and leased out for Royal Launceston Show, car parking for York Park Stadium, visiting circuses and other travelling events, exhibitions (car & caravan shows) etc. Site 2 is utilised as a public car park and other events.
  • this land has been identified by Council to be offered for private developments. Site 1 has been mooted by YPIPA as being suitable for hotel/retail developments with parking as a support facility for York Park Stadium; as a site for a cinema complex. Site 2 has been promoted by Council as being suitable for a multi-storey retail and apartment complex with parking (Council funded a comprehensive study and development concept plan at ratepayer expense; a large supermarket with car park facilities; in conjunction with the former Launceston Gasworks site significant multi-storey hotel developments have been proposed by private developers; Housing Tasmania has considered the site for public housing development, the adjacent car museum has expressed interest in acquiring part of this land for expansion of the National Automobile Museum.
  • this land presently supports major events in City Park (Festivale, TSO Concerts etc.) and Albert Hall Convention and Exhibition Centre (antique and trade fairs, gala ball and concerts, special events) as essential car parking.
By gifting this land for University purposes, not only will all of the above activities be either prevented, restricted or loses valuable car parking facilities etc., the income presently enjoyed by ratepayers will be significantly reduced as well as income to ratepaying operators and businesses adjacent to these sites will be reduced and tourism and tourist accommodation and food and beverage services will be adversely impacted upon.
The University of Tasmania is an entity that does not pay any rates.   A conservative estimate of capital value of the AMC and Utas campus alone would be easily in the order of $200 million, which at 4% of Capital Value equates to $8 million in AAV and hence more than $500,000 in foregone general rates.  The fire levy alone on this AAV could be in excess of $150,000.
Does the fire brigade not have to attend fires at UTAS?
Do Launceston ratepayers get a student fees exemption from UTAS?
It may well be that UTAS is exempted from rates by legislation, but if it is to be a full member of the community, it can choose to pay rates, or the legislation can be changed.
  • Even if argued by proponents and the University that a university stimulates and assists economic improvements for nearby commercial operations, there is no mechanism employed for Council and other statutory authorities to charge such alleged business beneficiaries for the alleged business improvements and hence increased municipal rates and other utility and service charges.
  A university development of the scale and intensity as described in publicity issued by the University of Tasmania and Launceston City Council, shall
  • increase the pressure for public funding including ratepayer funding of flood protection measures and liabilities for flood damage to structures and their occupants (both sites are located on flood plains that are not fully protected);
  • increase the risk to buildings and occupants due to the relativity of the sites to known geological fault lines (expert geophysicists have already alerted Council to the serious risks of developments of this intensity and recommended that due to seismic evidence and risk factors, maximum building heights near these fault lines is 4 storeys and maximum occupation is no more than 200 people);
  • increase the demands on public infrastructure such as water, sewerage and stormwater utilities and treatment headworks and outfalls; roads and bridges including foot and bicycle carriageways and bridges;
  • cause significant increases in traffic and parking congestion and environmental pollution;
  • place increased economic pressures on existing land and building users in the vicinity, by forcing up values and rents and pricing existing occupants out of the market;
  • create a potential ghetto environment and potential social downgrading of the area due to a higher level of low socio-economic residents in this vicinity.
  • create an over-intensification of development of these two parcels of land and be inconsistent with the level of intensity in the vicinity thereby changing the character of the area and the present level of enjoyment by ratepayers and citizens in the vicinity;
  • change the standard of amenity and alter what is presently available giving an unknown style or gentrification to the locality resulting in potential conflicts; 
Away from Inveresk and the Willis St sites and to focus on the northern suburbs, this proposed development shall
  • disadvantage the suburbs of Mowbray and Newnham because of their loss of activities and existing economic benefits;
  • potentially allow for inappropriate developments to occur at the existing Newnham campus as it will become necessary to put whatever users are available into that site, incompatible or otherwise, in order to maintain and protect the area;
  • waste valuable carbon storages present in the existing Newnham campus buildings as much of that building infrastructure will be potentially destroyed.
·      Accordingly these adverse factors are not in the interests of ordinary ratepayers and citizens of Launceston.

Accordingly these adverse factors are not in the interests of ordinary ratepayers and citizens of Launceston, and in any event the land ought not be gifted.

Lionel Morrell 

1 comment:

Diana Thomas said...

This submission contains many facts and views that are never contested by Councillors or proponents of this crazy idea to move a University a few minutes down the road.
In the absence of any other contesting view, we can properly assume it all to be true.
On that basis, why are the Aldermen continuing to talk as they do without any evidence and without delivering the Business Plan?
From my back row seat at the public meeting I was pleased to see the billboard portraits of the featured Aldermen, because at least I could see the whites of their eyes otherwise hidden under lowered heads in the front row !!