RE: The removal of Bald Hill Rd trees without adequate notification or a Development application.
Please refer to http://baldhillroad7250.blogspot.com.au/ for more details
As you will see from the documentation on the website provided above you will see that the trees of concern here are a part of a ‘cultural landscape’ rather than three trees inconveniently located in the way of a stormwater pipe. As you may be aware the community's attention has been drawn to Launceston Council's intent to remove three trees to make way for an even larger stormwater pipe than currently exists to divert stormwater to the Trevallyn Rivulet(?) and to The Tamar eventually.
There are a number of issues that arise here depending upon how the trees that are proposed to be removed are ‘valued’ and by extension the status of the stormwater management strategy that brings their potential removal about. It is of considerable concern that no Development Application has been made to Council for the trees’ removal. By extension people who use and traverse this ‘landscape’ have not had an adequate opportunity to voice their concerns. I’ve only had the issue drawn to my attention via a accidental sighting of council’s rather small advertisement.
The Amenity Issue
These three trees represent, and have, a significant amenity value and especially so in this location – this cultural landscape. It is acknowledged that the trees will fall behind what Launceston Council’s planners call the ‘military crest’ and are therefore not protected, nor covered by, the city's skyline protection strategies.
Nonetheless, this arguably dose not diminish these trees’ amenity, at least not for those who live on Trevallyn, who own property near the precinct and recreate in the area.
- Given that the trees are likely to be something between 40 years and 50 years old how might they be replaced – and like for like? Has this been considered?
- Given that this is a much used recreation area, has the amenity been actually considered, or adequately considered in the planning for their removal?
Council was asked to identify them via a GOOGLEearth snap in order that the community impacted upon by council’s decision might make an informed decision about what they are being asked to approve by implication of the advertisement.
Yet is is asserted by council officers that they do not need put up a Development Application in this case albeit that this project impacts upon the community's amenity of place. This seems a somewhat outrageous assertion that council might grant itself permission without reference to either the community or the aldermen.
The Stormwater Management Issue
Why is it that it is believed that an even larger stormwater pipe is in fact required or indeed appropriate and ‘best practice’?
It is now quite well understood, in fact a widely held belief that in urban situation it is important to “return stormwater to the landscape” via swales, rain gardens, retention basins, etc. in order to slow the pace water flows across urban landscapes and/or to filter the water through the landscape.
Indeed, in Launceston, given the current diabolical state of the river, retuning the water to the landscape would be an appropriate strategy to investigate in every possible instance and possibly implement in this case – once all the facts are in hand.
Piping stormwater, untreated stormwater, into the river is as it turns out is a totally inappropriate and somewhat dodgy strategy and one that has exasperated the pollution levels in The Tamar over time.
Interestingly, this stormwater being ‘managed’ here by-and-large originates in West Tamar Council precincts. If The Tamar is ever to become a clean waterway mindlessly consigning untreated stormwater into it must stop! Arguably, if stormwater is to be managed appropriately there needs to be a whole-of-landscape approach with meaningful inter-jurisdiction collaboration in play.
It may seem a small thing in this instance but at sometime we, as a community, need to start somewhere in order to be good environmental managers. Why not here? Why not now?
Quite possibly it may well turn out that retuning stormwater to the landscape here would be an economic and sustainable alternative to the current plan. Let's see a plan and what can be achieved!
It has been claimed that this project is “urgent” but there seems to be no evidence of that during the recent flood rains. It is possible that the urgency is fiscal and tied up with spending funds before some cut-ff date. Is that the case?
Is there any possibility at all that your two council might consider cooperating and developing a strategy that might even be seen as a demonstration project?
That question has been put to Launceston Council officers but they seem disinclined to pursue anything of the sort.
The Tamar region really does need to manage its stormwater, and the river, much much better and it seems that this site may well present an opportunity for two councils to demonstrate their environmental concerns and credentials, PLUS earn for themselves in some small way some ‘street creds’.
If this project is actually put to the community via a Development Application, and the alternative environmental management strategies are actually investigated, there are real opportunities for some win-wins.
I look forward to Council's response with considerable interest. I feel quite sure once the community is engaged with in a meaningful way a consensus can be found that will enable the trees to be retained and the stormwater managed much more appropriately.
Regards,
Ray
Ray Norman
<zingHOUSEunlimited>
The lifestyle design enterprise and research network
“A body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” Thomas Paine
“The standard you walk past is the standard you accept ” David Morrison
No comments:
Post a Comment