DEVELOPMENT on Mt Wellington, a Battery Point walkway, light rail, ferries, a floating ferry hub, a flyover transport network – Hobart has had many grand development ideas over the decades.

Some have quickly become part of the fabric of the city, such as the new Brooke St Pier.

Others take a few years to get off the ground, like the Myer redevelopment and Parliament Square.

And some never go beyond a mere thought bubble and die a slow and painful death after years of discussion.

In most cases, these projects rely on public support to be successful.

media_camera An artist’s impression Battery Point walkway, which was knocked on the head after public backlash. Picture: SUPPLIED

Hobart City Council general manager Nick Heath said this week it was continued public backing over many years that encouraged council to keep pursuing the Battery Point walkway.

MORE: HCC WALKS AWAY FROM BATTERY POINT WALKWAY PLAN

The city is currently going through a development surge, with a new hotel project seemingly announced every month or so.

MORE: MACQUARIE ST NEW TOURIST MECCA

With these announcements often come criticism and cynicism.

Alderman Damon Thomas refers to this as a “Tasmanian syndrome” in today’s Talking Point.

Former Tasmanian resident Barry George said on themercury.com.au this week “never in my long lifetime have I ever known a population like those of Hobart and southern Tasmania to be so blind as to the many and different ways of promoting the place as a top tourist destination. Whenever any suggestion is put forward, the knockers come out of the woodwork”.

media_camera A 1960s proposal for elevated highways around Hobart.

However, transport economist Bob Cotgrove said overall, Hobart was not a community of naysayers.

He said there is a reason why particular projects never get up.

“If someone has an idea for a five-star hotel somewhere in Hobart, they don’t put it up to the government as say ‘you pay for it’ — they finance it themselves,” he said.

“It seems to me if someone wants to put a cable car up at Mt Wellington, there is planning approval needed, but it shouldn’t be the ratepayers who pay for it, the [proponents] should have the money to do it themselves and then put it up as a proposal.

“The same with the light rail out to the northern suburbs — the proponents for that say it is going to do wonders, but if that is the case they should get the money up and do it and make the profit for it.

“They know it’s not going to be profitable and then the ratepayers are the ones who end up paying for it.

“It is not an answer to 21st Century issues.”

media_camera An artist’s impression of the proposed Northern Suburbs light rail, which will be analysed by Infrastructure Tasmania in the next six months.

BPSM Architects director Damian Rogers said in trying to balance its built heritage and natural environment, the state was unable to discriminate between high value areas and progress as opposed to saving everything.

“Tasmania seems to have developed a political system that is over-reacting to minority pressure groups, the balance of what is best for the community has been lost in the mantra of consultation, giving activists a say that carries more weight than the silent majority,” he said.

However, University of Tasmania cultural sociologist Nicholas Hookway said sections of the community were often labelled “anti-development” when they simply supported a specific viewpoint.

“Anti-development is often mobilised as a pejorative label to demonise green or environmental groups, who may oppose controversial developments based on environmental, health, social or other grounds,” he said.

“So being anti-development is not simply a case of being resistant to change, but reflects how different groups have competing interests and visions of what progress looks like.

“Supposed anti-development groups may question whether development is really about progressing the wider interests of the community or the narrow economic interests of the few.”

MORE: FLYOVER ONE OF FEW TRAFFIC OPTIONS LEFT FOR HOBART

Architect and town planner Robert Vincent has studied the history of Hobart’s planning since 1972.

Before he went into private practice, he was the author of the Heritage Topic Report 1991 for the Central Area Strategy Plan for the Hobart City Council and was active in the North Hobart Residents’ Group 1977-1982 and in the Battery Point Planning Scheme Review from 1972-79.

He said now was the perfect time to debate the overall vision for the city.

“We haven’t had a good debate or vision discussion since the 70s,” he said.

“We desperately need it because Hobart now needs to recognise its unique identity in that it isn’t the same as Melbourne or Sydney — it doesn’t have to follow other places.

“Some of the things people come up with, you wonder if they realise that Hobart only changes gradually.

“It doesn’t change with a big bang like other cities with huge capital investment.”

The key to moving forward with modern appropriate projects is freeing up the planning system and reducing delays, Australian Institute of Building Tasmanian Chapter president Peter Overton said.

“It is great to see some large building projects currently in progress in Hobart, however it is a shame they take so long to get off the ground compared to mainland states,” he said.

“This delay unfortunately turns off investors from doing business in Tasmania, reducing training opportunities, economic growth and an improved built environment for Tasmanians.

“Tasmania is unique with so many councils processing planning applications. One comparison is Canberra which has one planning authority for a similar population that is very streamlined, efficient and professional.”

TALKING POINT: STRUGGLING IN A CITY ON THE MOVE

MORE: SKY-HIGH PLAN FOR 117m TOWER

MORE: SEE IT AS OUR BIG, BOLD OPPORTUNITY

RELATED: OLD KINGSTON HIGH SCHOOL SITE SET FOR REVAMP