ROSS HART A CULTURAL DIMENSION

ROSS HART MEMBER FOR BASS

A Shorten Labor Government will build upon the Launceston City Deal by investing $20 million in key projects through our City Partnerships program.

This extension will ensure ongoing collaboration with local government, local businesses and local communities through to 2027 and will also include the development of a Cultural Strategy for Launceston.  

Labor sees Launceston’s future as one of the world’s leading regional cities, with a vibrant cultural lifestyle that embraces the arts, performance, business and sporting achievements, with a unique Northern Tasmania feel. 

Albert Hall Cultural and Convention Centre

As part of the extension Labor will invest $10 million towards reinvigorating the Albert Hall into a multi-purpose convention, events and performance centre.

The Albert Hall is an iconic community space for Launceston and this new investment will reinvigorate it to provide a 500 seat plus cultural and convention centre for Launceston whilst retaining its important heritage aspects and service to the community as a public meeting place.

This critical investment will enable the City to attract a broad range of cultural and business events, ensuring that Launceston fully capitalises on Tasmania’s tourism boom.

The revitalised space would include two commercial kitchens and the capacity to host multi-day conventions with break out spaces, potentially catering for more than 1,000 people, a major expansion on the City’s existing capacity. 

Growing visitation to 350,000 people annually is central to Labor’s vision for business growth and new jobs in Northern Tasmania.

The Albert Hall revitalisation will be done sensitively, working with the whole Launceston community to design something that Launceston residents can be proud of.

A new Northern Suburbs Community and Recreation Hub

In addition, a Shorten Labor Government will invest $10 million towards making a new Community & Recreation Hub in Launceston’s Northern Suburbs a reality. The new Community & Recreation Hub will provide community support and recreation activities and will be located in Mowbray, on Invermay Road. 

The Community & Recreation Hub will provide a range of non-recreational programs in multi-use spaces, ball courts, a gym, boxing, climbing and skate and cycle sports indoor.

The addition of new court space for basketball will help to address the current lack of supply in Launceston. 

An outdoor soccer pitch is also proposed, whilst an indoor skate and cycle sports centre will be unique to Tasmania.

It is expected the new hub will be visited by 300,000 people each year, including by many people who would otherwise not have the opportunity to participate in the activities on offer. 

The concept for the Community & Recreation Hub has evolved from community consultation out of the Northern Suburbs Revitalisation Strategy, a part of the Launceston City Deal. 

This is another major commitment from Labor to Launceston’s Northern Suburbs, coming on top of recent announcements of $3.5 million to transform and rebuild TAFE at Alanvale and a $30 million commitment towards establishing a new Maritime Defence, Innovation and Design Precinct at the Australian Maritime College in Newnham.

Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery as a Cultural Institute

Labor will also work with the City of Launceston, the Launceston Chamber of Commerce and other key stakeholders to progress the development of a cultural institute based at the Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery in Wellington Street, with important linkages to Launceston’s iconic Gorge. It is envisioned the new institute will create magnetism for Launceston as a cultural destination for all Tasmanians and visitors.

Multi-Sports Arena

Labor also appreciates the very real need to improve Launceston’s capacity to host significant indoor national sporting tournaments, be a home for national level court-based teams and provide more capacity to host large music concerts and performances. 

Throughout this campaign Labor has delivered significantly superior commitments for Northern Tasmania, having committed more than double the funding promises of our Liberal opponents who seem to have forgotten Northern Tasmania exists at all. 

Labor’s superior Bass commitments include:

• $35 million for a new 32 new bed sub-acute care unit co-located with the Launceston General Hospital, to address bed block and ambulance ramping.
• $15 million for a new Community Mental Health Hub in Launceston with 25 acute care beds, relieving pressure on the LGH Emergency Department.
• $1 million for upgrades to the Launceston General Hospital Emergency Department to address ambulance ramping.
• Bringing 100 new doctors, nurses and health workers to Northern Tasmania.
• Investing in Hydrogen Production & Export at Bell Bay through Labor’s $1.14 billion National Hydrogen Plan, with the potential for thousands of new local jobs.
• $30 million to establish a Maritime Defence, Innovation and Design Precinct at the Australian Maritime College in Newnham, creating 150 new jobs each year.
• $47 million to construct new overtaking lanes on the West Tamar and Frankford Highways and two new roundabouts at Exeter.
• Upgrading the Sideling to B-Double standard, creating a wider and straighter road with new passing lanes.
• $5 million to build a co-work premium Tasmanian fermented food and beverage factory at Legana, supporting 350 new jobs.
• $12 million extra for local public schools in Bass.
• $3.5 million to transform and rebuild TAFE in Northern Tasmania to allow for the modernisation of course delivery across a range of key trades, including electrotech, construction, metal trades and automotive as well as new facilities and simulation equipment for nursing, aged care and disability support courses.
• $4.4 million for the George Town Mountain Bike Trail, bringing jobs and tourists to the region.
• $3.6 million to reconstruct and seal Palana Road on Flinders Island.
• $3.55 million to improve Dalrymple Road and The Glen Road, including better bridges.
• $3.5 million for equipment upgrades at Timberlink, securing 200 jobs.
• $3 million to redevelop the Beauty Point Foreshore making it more attractive for locals and visitors.
• $2 million to fix Mobile Black Spots, including at Trevallyn, Greens Beach, Kelso and Grindelwald.
• $2 million for improvements at local grassroots AFL and soccer grounds including Churchill Park, Windsor Park, Birch Avenue, NTCA, Rocherlea Football Club, Bridgenorth Football Club, George Town Football Club, Hillwood Football Club, Scottsdale Football Club and Bridport Football Club.

• $2.45 million to finish the Regent Square Redevelopment.
• $300,000 for trails at the Hillwood Foreshore, between George Town and Low Head, and a new Coastal Trail.
• $220,000 to upgrade boat ramps at Weymouth, Tomahawk and Musselroe Bay.
• $400,000 for two new Mountain Bike Pump Tracks, one for George Town and one for Scottsdale, to expand growth in mountain bike tourism.
• Building the Tamar-Pipers irrigation scheme, delivering 6,500 megalitres of water to local farmers, as part of a state-wide investment of $100 million to create up to 3,900 new jobs.

• Fully funding the Gravelly Beach Structure Plan.
• Funding to support the Greens Beach Community Hub proposal.

This election is a choice between Labor’s plan for local investments in Northern Tasmania to fix the health crisis, rebuild TAFE, create new jobs and build vital infrastructure, or a $35 million cut to Tasmania’s hospitals to pay for bigger tax loopholes for the top end of town under the Liberals.

After six years of Liberal cuts and chaos, our united Labor team is ready.

THE HON ANTHONY ALBANESE MP

SHADOW MINISTER FOR INFRASTRUCTURE, TRANSPORT, CITIES AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

SHADOW MINISTER FOR TOURISMMEMBER FOR GRAYNDLER

GO TO SOURCE

Tasmania's FOI regime crippled by 'outrageous' delays, academics say This article is more than 3 months old Chronically understaffed watchdog’s office means backlog on decisions will worsen, ombudsman says Supported by About this content Christopher Knaus @knausc Mon 14 Jan 2019 04.00 AEDTLast modified on Mon 14 Jan 2019 04.02 AEDT .......................... The lack of FOI transparency in Tasmania meant voters had no idea during last year’s election campaign just how influential the gambling industry was. Photograph: Yevgeny Reutov/Tass Academics and journalists say delays are crippling Tasmania’s freedom of information regime as new figures reveal the state’s understaffed public watchdog is struggling under the weight of its growing workload. The lack of political transparency in Tasmania was laid bare in last year’s election, when voters were left unaware of the true influence of powerful gaming interests due to its weak and sluggish donation disclosure system, widely considered the worst in the nation. Tasmania’s right-to-information (RTI) system, however, was envisioned as one of the strongest of any state or territory when legislation was introduced in 2010........................... • Sign up to receive the top stories in Australia every day at noon Advertisement .......................... But the RTI system is now beset by delays. Tasmania has been the worst performer on making RTI decisions within the statutory timeframes for two of the past three years on record. When decisions are made, they are by far the most likely to be appealed of any jurisdiction. About 7.6% of the state government’s RTI decisions are appealed to the ombudsman, more than double the rate of Queensland, the next closest jurisdiction. Experts and the ombudsman have repeatedly said the high number of appeals are because the government fails to give adequate reasons when it refuses to release documents. The chronically understaffed ombudsman’s office has just one officer working on RTI reviews. The 50 cases before the ombudsman have been open for 415 days on average, according to data provided to Guardian Australia. It took an average of 318 days to complete an RTI review last financial year, up from 230 days the year before. The cases closed so far this financial year have taken an average of 687 days, although that number will fall as the year goes on........................... The ombudsman said the problem would worsen unless the office was given more staff. .......................... How a flawed freedom-of-information regime keeps Australians in the dark Read more.......................... “With only a single staff member and a growing trend nationally of applicants seeking external review, it is likely the backlog will progressively worsen over time if resourcing levels remain the same,” the ombudsman said........................... “Any delay will undermine the ongoing effectiveness of the external review process.”.......................... A Tasmanian academic and FOI expert, Rick Snell, described the situation as “an absolute farce” and “just outrageous”. The backlog meant those making RTI decisions would not have to face the ombudsman’s scrutiny for years, by which time they were likely to have left or changed roles, he said. “There is a fix, and that is to give the ombudsman immediately more staffing and resources,” he said........................... Emily Baker, a political reporter with the Hobart Mercury, has seen examples of journalists waiting four years for an RTI appeal to be resolved. “I’ve only been back working in Tasmania for about four months but, by way of example, an ABC journalist who appealed against an RTI decision in September 2014 only received a response in October 2018,” Baker said........................... “The journalist has since left the state and the government-owned business that was the subject of the RTI has rebranded. The information – likely important in 2014 – is now relatively redundant.” .......................... Snell said the ombudsman’s workload also created flow-on problems. The ombudsman had almost no ability to train government RTI officers, and had not updated the RTI guidelines or manual since 2010........................... “There’s been no response from the government to even admit that they’ve got a problem, and certainly no response in providing the ombudsman with some spare staff to at least start addressing some of the key backlogs,” Snell said. .......................... .......................... NT used freedom-of-information laws to suppress Don Dale CCTV footage Read more.......................... A spokeswoman for the Hodgman government responded to queries by sending Guardian Australia a two-sentence statement, which was word-for-word for the response given to the ABC months earlier. “We have every confidence in the ombudsman’s office to undertake their duties,” it said. “While the office operates independently of government, we will continue to consult with the ombudsman’s office when it comes to budget submissions and matters of resourcing.” The state government has moved on several other fronts to improve transparency in recent years. It has improved its disclosure of gifts to ministers and departments, and recently committed to a review of the electoral act, which controversially prevents newspapers publishing election content on election day. .......................... But Baker said transparency of political donations was still sorely lacking. A recent poll by the Hobart Mercury found 94% of Tasmanians wanted improvements to the donations disclosure regime. “Tasmania follows commonwealth guidelines, meaning we still don’t know who funded what in the March 2018 state election and could theoretically never find out the full extent of donations made,” she said. Advertisement The RTI scheme needed greater resourcing and greater consistency in application across various agencies. “There is a sense of interference in some departments when RTI requests are made,” she said. “For example, staff from one minister’s office were revealed as discussing journalists’ RTIs, and I have had a media staffer call me after making an RTI request. As well, unfortunately like anywhere, RTIs are often heavily redacted.” .......................... … we have a small favour to ask. More people are reading and supporting our independent, investigative reporting than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford........................... The Guardian is editorially independent, meaning we set our own agenda. Our journalism is free from commercial bias and not influenced by billionaire owners, politicians or shareholders. No one edits our editor. No one steers our opinion. This is important as it enables us to give a voice to those less heard, challenge the powerful and hold them to account. It’s what makes us different to so many others in the media, at a time when factual, honest reporting is critical. Every contribution we receive from readers like you, big or small, goes directly into funding our journalism. This support enables us to keep working as we do – but we must maintain and build on it for every year to come...........................

UTAS: Letters to the Editor

UTAS is apparently loosing its shine as a corporate citizen and there is a risk that it will also loose its Social Licence too. In a way its not too surprising. In Launceston they have been trampling all over ratepayer's aspirations in concert with 'the Council'.

The with so much contention in the air UTAS just could not resist getting its hubris out and putting it on display in Hobart. So here are some of the responses they have drawn in The Mercury.

HOT TOPIC: FLANAGAN AND UNI’S CITY SHIFT 

Call a halt and reassess 
RICHARD Flanagan is right to point to the serious problems presented by the University of Tasmania’s handling of its decision to relocate into the CBD (Talking Point, April 20).

The university is “of Tasmania”, after all, with an obligation to engage with the Tasmanian community in an open and direct fashion, something it has not done so far.

Professor Black is an able champion of the need for the university to rethink and reshape itself, but he has inherited a management that has largely lost touch with the real values of education and research.

The shortcomings in the university’s proposal, the evident lack of genuine consultation, and the considerable opposition the proposal has generated ought to lead the university to call a halt to the current process, reassessing where it is and where it might be heading.

Jeff Malpas Grove 

Who gave permission? 
RICHARD Flanagan was spot on about Tas Uni moving into the city. I cannot believe Hobart City Council is incapable of seeing what is going to happen and identifying the consequences.

Who gives permission for Tas Uni to make the city centre a campus? Surely the council is responsible for managing the nature and atmosphere of Hobart.

Hobart’s traffic problems are the consequence of lack of foresight from some time back but if the university is allowed to colonise the city centre, all that traffic which currently parks at Sandy Bay will move into West and North Hobart displacing the people who work in the city but park in those suburbs just a walking distance from the city centre.

Already those suburbs are parked during working hours. I imagine students will park there overnight and cause further problems for residents who currently can’t park outside their own houses during the day.

Quite frankly I cannot imagine a student from overseas preferencing a university consisting of disconnected ugly office blocks and having no obvious cohesive centre over one situated at the existing site where students meet their peers in pleasant grounds.

The university has become a money-making machine and we the residents of Hobart are going to become collateral damage.

Bridget Landrell West Hobart.

Bees start buzzing 
THE move of UTAS to Hobart has been an issue that hasn’t caused the bees in my bonnet to buzz, until I saw that Richard Flanagan thinks it is a terrible idea.

I know a few people with work connections to UTAS and they are also scornful of the idea. As I ask around and read around, I discover it is progressing with the speed of an alpine avalanche, even though nearly everyone thinks it is a terrible idea, leading to the questions – why, and what is the hidden agenda? 

Keith Anderson Kingston

Launceston, too 
THE proposed move into central Hobart continues to confuse most of us.

The many questions asked by Richard Flanagan deserve answers. An almost parallel situation is evolving in Launceston where the university is proposing to move from its Newnham campus site to Inveresk, which adjoins the city centre.

The Inveresk site is very limited in area and sits on the crust of the ancient Invermay swamp, which is likely to liquefy with the next major Tamar Valley geological event, considered by some geologists to be long overdue.

Even today heavy transports vibrate grounds and buildings as they pass. In scale, location and logistics, the Newnham campus site is similar to the Sandy Bay site in many respects.

What is the truth behind the proposed moves? Is the plan to make easy access near impossible for most students, thereby forcing them to go online rather than attending on-site lectures thus creating more enrolments and an even greater profit, for whom?

Peter Anderson Launceston

That’s me gone 
THANK you, Richard Flanagan. I was privileged to know you many years ago, when you were a graduate assistant. I was also privileged to work at UTAS for over 25 years, and to study there as a mature- age student (nowadays very mature!) since 2005.

Having completed a degree in Antarctic Science I am enrolled in the university’s new Legal Studies degree, which is just fantastic and completion of which means a very great deal to me. However, for practical reasons, the day Law and Humanities move into the city will be the day I withdraw (very reluctantly) from the course. Please UTAS, re-think.

Christine Hurley Richmond 

QUICK VIEWS 
Benefit over boldness 
GOOD on you Richard Flanagan for expressing what many are thinking about the Tas Uni move (Talking Point, April 20). The patronising attitude of those in charge is sadly predictable and the hype and spin for the move has reached new levels of idiocy.

Everything, it appears, must be exciting, bold and groundbreaking instead of sensible, considered and of benefit to all Hobartians.

Tim Beaumont Hobart .

Can I leave my cave yet? 
WOULD some caring greenie please tell me when it will be safe to leave my cave where I sought refuge from the sun because of the expanding hole in the ozone layer. Or maybe I should stay put until some other disaster called nature takes over from climate change.

J. Pritchard Claremont

Richard Flanagan Speaks Up

Richard Flanagan has earned the authority to give his university a serve, a well deserved serve, and when he does he speaks with an authority respected far and wide. He is never backward in coming forward to tell it like it is and from a wider perspective than the position self-serving institutions typically assert/deem their 'rightness' from.

UTas in the Mercury's contributions to the debate to do with their aspiration, self-indulgent and ill-conceived aspirations, to shift camp and apparently on little more than a whim and informed by something at best that might be an 'intuition', a 'feeling in the waters', that seems to go something like "if we do something then something will happen somehow" – not too dissimilar to betting everything on black in a roulette game.

Even now in the 21st Century academic institutions, especially so for universities, would do well to take note  of Immanuel Kant when he said “thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind.” Nothing would seem so blind, or indeed so empty, as to operate upon a whim plucked from 'the winds of failing fortunes' in some hollow hope that 'things will get better somehow' while one holds a wet finger aloft.

In any event if when you read The Mercury's 'Flanagan articles' you swap Launceston for Hobart you'll recognise the basic story being told. Click here to read the articles.

FITCH QUESTIONS & RESPONSES APRIL 18 20190 – UTAS & GOVT FUNDING

Basil Fitch put a series of questions to Council in regard to issues around which there is either some ambiguity or avoidance of discussing them around the table and on the record. Arguably all these question should/could have been ask by Councillors in open council. For whatever reason there is a reluctance for Council to be transparent and accountable in regard to a range of issues of interest to ratepayers et al.

The questions and their responses are recorded here to to enable them to be more accessible to anyone researching matters related.

COUNCIL AGENDA Thursday 18 April 2019 7.1.1 

Public Questions on Notice - Mr Basil Fitch - 8 April 2019 FILE NO: SF6381

AUTHOR: Anthea Rooney (Committee Clerk) 

GENERAL MANAGER: Michael Stretton (General Manager) QUESTIONS and RESPONSES:

The following question/questions were submitted to Council on 8 April 2019 by Mr Basil Fitch and have been answered by Mr Michael Stretton (General Manager). 

Questions have been typed as they were received.

Question 1. Will Council please reveal the true and irrefutable facts in regard to Infrastructure Australia’s commitment to provide $150 Million towards UTas’s proposed relocation to Inveresk under the guise of UTas’s Northern Transformation?

Response: Whilst this question is more appropriately answered by the Australian Government or the University of Tasmania (UTAS), the Australian Government has committed $150 million investment into the Northern Transformation Project (NTP) to relocate the Launceston and Burnie University campuses.

Question 2. Given that there is any such a commitment when was it announced by Infrastructure Australia and how secure might the commitment be regarded as being?

Response: The Australian Government investment in the Launceston component of the NTP was announced bi-laterally at the last federal election. It was formalised as part of the Launceston City Deal and is formally contracted with UTAS via a Grant Deed. City of Launceston. 

Question 3. Is it the case that Infrastructure Australia itself, and alone, determines commitments exceeding $100 Million?.

Response: The following extract from Infrastructure Australia (IA) outlines its role. IA evaluates decisions on behalf of the Government who ultimately make the final determination. “Infrastructure Australia will undertake evaluations of project proposals that are nationally significant or where funding of more than $100 million is sought from the Commonwealth. This includes infrastructure proposals across all sectors, but excludes defence proposals.”

Question 4. Is it the case, as has been suggested, that Infrastructure Australia may not consider UTas’s Northern Transformation as appropriate infrastructure to be funded from within its budget and in accord with its priorities? 

Response: Infrastructure Australia does not allocate investment. IA assesses projects to inform Government decisions. 

Question 5. Has the Prime Minister made any firm and secure forward commitments in regard to ‘City Deal funding’ for Launceston in recent days/weeks? 

Response: Yes. The Federal Budget included $45 million (as well as $45 million from the State Government) for implementation of the Tamar River Health Action Plan which is a Launceston City Deal commitment. 

Question 6. Given Prof Adams’ reported understanding in the press that UTas has secured Infrastructure Australia’s $150 Million commitment towards UTas’s Northern Transformation planning, does this ‘understanding’ have any prospect of having real and reliable standing in the case of any possible outcome in the upcoming Federal election? 

Response: The funding from the Australian Government has already been committed via a formal Grant Deed with UTAS.

Question 7. Has Council estimated and quantified the ancillary infrastructure imposts that are likely to flow from UTas being able to realise its ‘staged development’ under its projected Northern Transforma tion aspirations - short and long term? 

Response:The Council has a clear understanding of the infrastructure requirements associated with the proposed re-location, including parking, people movement and stormwater/sewer (etc)

Question 8. Given that UTas is able to proceed with its Northern Transformation, by whatever means, has Council considered any planning constraints that it will impose upon the developments to mitigate against spiralling costs, given that UTas is a non-ratepaying ‘service soak’?

Response: The cost of the NTP is a matter for UTAS to answer, not the Council. However, it should be noted that the project will need to demonstrate compliance with the Launceston interim planning scheme. 

Question 9. In regard to ‘City Heart developments’, currently what are the unplanned cost overruns attributable to the projects on a project by project basis? 

Response: There have been no cost overruns with the City Heart projects. The three major projects: Quadrant Mall, Civic Square and Brisbane Street Mall re-developments have all been delivered within their respective budget allocations.

Question 10. What are the consequences to ratepayers flowing from these overruns and what mitigation is under ‘active consideration’ to alleviate any potential fiscal stress upon ratepayers? 

Response: Nil - refer answer to question 9.

Question 11. What are the major impediments to a positive future outlook flowing from the City Heart developments that constituents have identified and consequently what ‘community engagement activities’ is Council, and are Councillors, actively promoting and participating in to address the issues being identified?

Response:.Firstly, it should be acknowledged that the Civic Square re-development has been an overwhelming success in creating an active and dynamic public space which our community are using in a wide variety of ways. The increasing number of events held in the space, together with the increased day-to-day usage of the space by community members, is testament to all that the City Heart Project is seeking to achieve. Of course, the Council will continue to work to activate this space in new and interesting ways in the future and this will involve various forms of community engagement in the future. In respect to the Brisbane Street Mall redevelopment, the Council is in the process of completing an internal review of the project and this may result in a further community engagement approach around various design elements of this project.

Prof Rufus Black Plays Another Card

This turned up yesterday. Also an item on ABC TV news yesterday with the smiling VC. And for those with nothing else to do, a New Game: "VC! Pick the Vocab  Crap!" Instructions - find as many buzz words as you can. Give yourself 

one point per word. Add up the number of points, You win! so give 

yourselves a clap!

NB: Tis might just turn out to be 'FAKE NEWS' AND you will all note that UTAS will "pay its way in Hobart' whereas Launcestonioans have been screwed over by their Council and UTAS. Launceston gifts UTas land now worth $10Million plus and not a word about paying its way as in Hobart. 

NB: NO SUCH COMMITMENT TO PAY RATES IN LAUNCESTON NOT A SAUSAGE ALL COST FALL UPON THE RATEPAYERS

The good Prof Black is talked about elsewhere as "an ethicist", so there is another game you can play. Find the "moral compass in all this" and when you've done so, use it to find the "ethics." 

BTW: click here for the VC'S letter to his underlings!

ABC REPORT: Click Here

GOOD LUCK AND CAREFUL READING!!

FROM ...................... https://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/university-of-tasmania-makes-call-on-city-move/news-story/489fb885cef187594a22736f3c47a478?utm_source=The%20Mercury&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial

University of Tasmania commits to $600m move into Hobart CBD JIM ALOUAT and JAMES KITTO, Mercury April 5, 2019 5:52pm ...................... IN a move destined to change the Hobart CBD forever, the University of Tasmania will move away from its Sandy Bay campus and consolidate its future in the city....................... The game-changing plan will see UTAS develop a city-centric campus in the heart of Hobart during the next 10 to 15 years. It will cost the university $600 million to build its new campus....................... UTAS EXAMINES ‘CITY-CENTRIC’ MODEL IN HOBART...................... UTAS TO REVIEW CAMPUS SITE OPTIONS...................... The campus will run from the original home of the university at the Domain, along Melville St. At the heart of the inner-city campus will be a new central library and public square at the former Webster building and carpark bounded by Melville, Argyle and Bathurst streets....................... In a relief to many, the university will also enter an agreement with Hobart City Council to pay general rates on all its existing and future inner-city buildings for the next decade....................... The decision was announced late on Friday afternoon after a meeting of the UTAS Council in Burnie....................... ttps://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/729c3d69e84cdc17809ce6f561157737?width=1024 The University of Tasmania’s Sandy Bay campus....................... University Chancellor Michael Field said the university had decided on a long-term strategic direction to shift to the city....................... “This will be a long, thorough and deliberative process....................... “We will consult carefully along the way to produce a campus which is a source of great pride for both our university community and the people of greater Hobart.”...................... UTAS will act as steward for the existing Sandy Bay campus land into the future....................... In reaching its decision, the university weighed up two broad directions: the city-centric approach and a distributed model....................... The distributed model would have cost the university $575 million under which ageing Sandy Bay operations would be redesigned and rebuilt in a smaller footprint on the lower part of the existing campus....................... Two-thirds of the Sandy Bay buildings need replacement because of poor ratings for “building condition and functionality”, according to university documents....................... UTAS will retain ownership of the Sandy Bay campus and has plans for its future too. Vice-Chancellor Professor Rufus Black said it would invest in the Sandy Bay campus as a home for its students for the next decade. “In the long term, it will stay as the home for our sporting facilities, accommodation and specialist research facilities. “We will develop it over the long run so it has an appropriate mix of institutions, housing and preserves the green spaces.” ttps://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/4d1ad5f7998b6b885bcaef45a3841ba4?width=650A  map showing the proposed new University of Tasmania precincts. Professor Black said a critical factor in its decision was allowing students living across New Norfolk, Brighton/Bridgewater, Midway Point, Glenorchy and Huonville better access to the uni....................... “University council members saw that as very important,” he said. “It’s critical that more Tasmanians have access to higher education at all stages of life,”...................... The university already owns a significant amount of real estate in central Hobart....................... In the past four years, the uni has spent almost $80 million across properties on Argyle St and Melville St, the former Forestry building and the MidCity, Fountainside and Theatre Royal hotels....................... It has its media school, medicine school, a future performing arts centre and the School of Nursing and Midwifery in the Hobart city precinct. MORE UTAS NEWS:...................... UTAS SPLASHES THE CASH IN BUYING SPREE...................... ‘SIMPLIFICATION AGENDA’ IN UTAS’ SAVINGS BID STUDENTS CHALLENGED EVEN BEFORE CLASS STARTS Professor Black says a city campus would enhance the Hobart CBD and be great for city businesses....................... “It will bring a large number of people into the city for a 24/7 period,” he said. “I think it will help the city sustain and grow.” Reactions have been largely positive to the move....................... Hobart Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds welcomed the news, in particular the university’s 10-year commitment to pay general rates for all its inner-city properties....................... “It provides the council and Hobart community confidence that the university is going to pay its way investing in public infrastructure that will be needed to support this move into the city,” she said. “As Lord Mayor I have discussed with Vice-Chancellor Black the need for a clear agreement on city planning and the adequate funding of infrastructure, so I welcome his comments....................... “It is important that we continue to work together to meet the future requirements of the city.” ttps://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/12814aa60167a2051268724162432a5c?width=1024Hobart Lord Mayor Anna Reynolds has welcomed UTAS’s proposed move and its commitment to pay general rates. Picture: PATRICK GEE Professor Black said the University would now consult with stakeholders to help inform its detailed masterplanning and building design. “Our first step on this journey will be to pause, to listen to our Aboriginal community and ensure our new campus honours the values and history of our first people,” Professor Black said....................... Professor Black said concerns surrounding traffic management, parking and access to family services such as child care would be addressed. Tasmania University Union state council president Sharifah Zaliah Syed-Rohan called on UTAS to continue to consult with students....................... “This consultation must be student-centric and sincerely reflect the diverse perspectives and needs of our student body,” she said. “We believe that the new facilities must be purpose-built to ensure that our students are able to work and study in an environment that facilitates their development and educational demands.” \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Cautious welcome for UTAS's city move THERE are pros and cons to the University of Tasmania’s impending shift from Sandy Bay to Hobart’s CBD, business and community leaders have said. Overall the feeling is positive but some leaders have cautioned about the logistical challenge the move might bring. Real Estate Institute of Tasmania state executive Tony Collidge said the shift was a win for Hobart but only if the university was paying council rates and not leaving Hobartians “to pick up the tab for all the council costs”. “The other issue is ensuring that there is going to be enough accommodation available once the move happens and that it doesn’t pressure existing rental stock.” Tasmania Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Michael Bailey said UTAS’s CBD student accommodation, including the apartment block at Elizabeth St, brought economic energy to the area and he said he expected additional student learning spaces to do the same. “Looking at it from the HCC’s perspective, I would imagine the council would be seeing the economic benefit the CBD move would bring to Hobart,” he said. Mr Bailey said the shift, which he called “a boon for Hobart”, would need to bring with it some “work on traffic flows and congestion around the CBD”. RACT community and membership general manager Stacey Pennicott said the announcement underpinned the need for a long-term holistic vision for the future of mobility in Greater Hobart. “An increase in students and staff living, working and studying in the CBD will bring great benefits to this area, but also increase pressure on the existing infrastructure and public and active transport networks,” she said. Mrs Pennicott said RACT’s 30-year Greater Hobart Mobility Vision would be launched in the coming weeks. “We look forward to working closely with the University of Tasmania on how our vision works with theirs to make a sustainable future for all Tasmanians,” she said. Tasmanian Small Business Council executive officer Robert Mallet said the UTAS move to the city “wouldn’t be good for anyone”. “The CBD is about shopping, administration, Government, and business and very shortly it’s going to look like an overgrown high school,” he said “People can argue the economic benefits with having more people on the streets, but they are only students who don’t have the same amount of disposable income as many others.” A National Tertiary Education Union report released last month, which surveyed its Tasmanian-based members on the relocation, indicated the majority of those surveyed did not support a move. Of the 48 per cent of members who returned the survey, 75 per cent chose the distributed model (Sandy Bay campus), 16 per cent favoured the CBD model, and 7 per cent were undecided. Independent candidate for Nelson Madeleine Ogilvie said UTAS’s decision was “extremely disappointing” and would “create a gap in the cultural, intellectual, and creative life of the Sandy Bay community that would be very hard to fill”.