But there will be opposition, you can bet your bum on that!

 

Of course there will be.It's Australia after all

 

Aussie: We'll put in a road anywhere / everywhere - almost without question but put in a lift and all hell breaks loose.

 

I've always been ambivalent about the plans to be honest. It matters little to me given the sort of access I prefer. But I do recognise the summit area as it now stands is a total dog's breakfast and I'd love to see a plan for it being the prime focus of efforts. That may or may not include cable car access. It should also include the Springs area which is a wonderful staging point for a series of really great, sheltered trails, many of which are accessible for a wide range of people and abilities.

I think what I want most for any process is proper due diligence, transparent consultation and decision making and not letting a bunch of cowboys rock in, fail and then leave the state with a liability.

 

I think the three strongest arguments against are

1. Weather, it obviously gets pretty wild up there, what percentage of days will it be able to operate?
2. Is it going to be impossibly expensive to ride, enough that people are just going to skip it and drive up anyway, especially locals? Will they end up closing the road to force people to buy an $80 lift ticket?
3. There's a difference between opposing a lift in general, and opposing a particular group's slightly shady proposal for a lift. See PK's comment

My rock climbing friends on facebook are up in arms and whinging, I cynically suspect they really just don't want a peanut gallery watching them from up above all the time. Which to be fair, is a vibe-killer.

 

Personally I think the weather argument is a furphy. There would be very few days where operation would be impossible I am reckoning. I run up there regularly and that aspect of the mountain offers a great deal of shelter from the prevailing winds. These setups operate in high alpine environments around the world. Mt Wellington can't pose any greater challenge surely.

Lots of people will choose to go the low cost option up the road and to date it has been explicit that the operation of the cable car will not be contingent on restricting road access. It might provide some angles for management of "risk" though which could potentially see them being more trigger happy on the road access gates. But that is just a thought which has occurred to me on the fly and I haven't really worked it through.

I've got to say though that the road is really awful. Or rather, there are sufficient numbers of drivers who handle it poorly to make it an awful experience having to negotiate it.

 

So seeing as I was there recently I have been checking the web cams with relative frequency (currently a bit of snow up there right now https://www.hobartcity.com.au/Community/kunanyi-Mount-Wellington/kunanyi-Mount-Wellington-webcams ) and as the road status is linked on the web cam page I have also been checking the road status and what has surprised me is just how much the road has actually been closed this winter (due to snow events).

Been shut for what seems ages at a time so if that was the norm (not sure?) then I am all for some sort of cable car access up to the top so people can get up there and have a "play".

Of course echoing your comments @sbm_ I would hate to see it be cost prohibitive (because If I could I would love to use it often and would want others too as well) and would love to see it affordably priced but the cynic in me says it will likely be priced to gouge people

Reminds me a bit of the Banff Sulfer Mountain Gondola - I spent a couple of months in Banff years ago and rode it down a heap of times (was free down so I would hike up) but never paid to ride it up and just looking at its current pricing ($58 or $64 or $49 if you are a resident) I still wouldn't Seriously if you were a family of 4 that's $200 and I guess that's the issue if you get private operators involved - they want to recoup costs and them some!!

So I'm all for it - but as long as it was affordable

Did the city of Hobart or the state government ever enter into talks?

 

As the current Mayor pointed out this morning, the council has never actually received a Development Application in over 100 years of talking about it. I don't know to what extent they need to or should consult with the State Government BEFORE a DA is actually lodged? I guess there is a lot of brinkmanship going on around the proposal at the moment.

Ha ha! Your post Scooter reminded me of all the times I have stumped up and down the Buller road from Horse Hill because I wasn't going to pay the shuttle service to take me such a short distance. It was often rather unpleasant but I could spend the money I saved on beer so it wasn't all bad.

 

Will it take MTBs?

 

It would be mad not to I would have thought. It's such a growing segment of the tourism and leisure market. Derby, Eagles Eyrie etc are going gangbusters and helping to offset problems of regional employment at the same time.

 

I reckon the one-off ticket price has to be less than $30, and a local annual pass less than $200. Preferably closer to $100.

 

Similar pricing to Scenic World in TombTown.

 

Yeah I'm the same with Falls - have been there heaps (mostly staying at the top of the Village) and never even considered paying for over-snow

 

I heard it got voted down. Runs off to check

 

Yep, council voted down the application for a carve out of public land to make a road to a base station on the Main Fire Trail just past the end of old farm road. Just for context, that road would run through the tip at Mc Robies Gully (amusingly this is an anagram of microbes.....) but from there apparently through a habitat that is relatively rare. For some reason I can't quite figure it doesn't exactly follow the line of existing trails that go the same way. That means extra clearing of vegetation. When I first heard of the plan I thought they'd use the existing and then the footprint/impact would have been fairly minimal.

State Government is pretty keen for it to happen but they recently got cold feet once the proponents started putting in survey pegs on the summit. I don't quite know what they are willing to do but I sense a degree of nervousness. If push ever comes to shove it will be a real hotbed issue.

Glenorchy city council have been telling the proponents for ages they are welcome to use land to create a route from the North. It would be much longer and more expensive to build however.

 

I can't recall to be honest. But when the survey pegs and tape started to appear on the Summit, Peter Gutwein declared the original approval for surveying was no longer relevant due to changes between what was submitted and approved and what was later modified. The impression I got at the time was that there was more than just procedural considerations governing Gutwein's response. The language was pretty abrupt. They were told to desist immediately.

Actually, it could have been decidedly procedural and may have been a reminder to the proponents that while they might have the ear of government it needs to be done scrupulously above board as there is a lot of contention around the project.

 

FYI http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-03/lake-malbena-project-gets-federal-go-ahead/10196478

I'm rather undecided on this one. I'd be a lot happier if they weren't flying helicopters into that area. Can't they walk in? I reckon I can cope with the standing camp setup if it is sensitively done but not the choppers. If you spend time in that part of the world you really can appreciate the remoteness of it.

 

You're the guy from Big Bang Theory right?

 

I could be but I've never watched it so can't confirm.

 

That is pure gold, especially delivered deadpan.

 

I'm glad somebody else liked it. I've mentioned it before but people just looked nervous and sidled away from me........

 

i agree. camp or huts ok but fk choppers

 

Highland Council just voted down the planning application for the "Standing camp". The Mayor made a very blunt comment that it should not have been down to the Central Highlands Council to do due diligence that the State and Federal level governments neglected (ignored more likely). Interestingly they went way beyond the basic planning regulations in their decision and noted that the helicopter intrusion in particular was not appropriate in the World Heritage area. They also expressed concern about environmental waste and water runoff management of the camp and the appalling lack of consultation with aboriginal custodians. The term "standing camp" was a crock too. But that's just me adding that last bit. I assume the developer has the right to re-lodge a revised application. Interesting to see where it goes from here. State government is really keen.

 

Feds chucking big money at tassie atm. They always have (because its a negative economy) but now they seem to be going bigger. The tourism dollar from their ROI is going to push some poor decision making imo

 

It's a bit Matrix-inspired. ScoMo seems to see us as a big battery at the moment.

 

Having just driven up to the summit a couple of weeks ago for the first time ever I found it to be a pretty hairy experience. For the record, I have skied for 35 years and driven every mountain road in Aus & NZ, so I like to think I have some knowledge in regard to driving on windy mountain roads which are often covered in snow etc.

The amount of foreign tourists driving up and down this road in rental cars and vans with absolutely no idea what they are doing was astounding. Never seen anything like it. They drive straight up the middle of the road and will not move!! This was on a fine sunny March day, so I can only imagine how scary it would be in poor weather. Then the road is being used by hikers and cyclists as well.

The cable car if done properly has to be a winner. Restrict road access to locals who obviously use it for many different recreational purposes. Surely there are council rangers who could police this. They locked up the northern beaches for locals only years ago and gave them all parking permits for the beach car parks and everyone else pays a small fortune to park there. Do a similar thing in Hobart but only allow locals to park on the road or at the top. A small yearly fee for a parking permit and anyone else who dares drive up there without the permit cops a massive fine. Put big nasty signs at the bottom warning of the fines or even have a tow away policy. Make sure the tourists are aware of this then heavily promote the use of the cable car. Even if was 80 bucks for a return ride tourists will happily pay it. It's a unique experience and it's not like they're coming back to do it again.

Thredbo is 39 bucks for a one off return ride so with the comforts of being protected from the elements in a cable car, with the benefit of food options at the top, toilets, the view and access to many walking tracks, then maybe somewhere close to 80 bucks isn't far off the mark? Most cars would chew through 10 to 15 bucks of fuel in the return drive anyhow.

I saw all the locals signs driving up opposing the cable car. If you live near or on that road why would you want to deal constantly with all that traffic and pollution when you chose to live there in the first place because of the connection to the environment!

 

Though Team Bears had a better plan!
$80 return....you cannot be serious with this proposal !
The Bears Zip Line was much more cost effective.
You need to draw on professionals in the engineering world to solve these environmental problems....

 

I used to make them out of Lego and lengths of my mum's wool. They were ace!

 

The formal application has been lodged with Hobart City Council:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-06-12/mount-wellington-cable-car-application-lodged/11203370

 

Will be interesting. The Mayor is an independent and ex-Green and there is a definite split between pro and anti. I believe the anti side will have the numbers. The State Government will then find some controversial way to intervene and make it happen anyway. A further shit-fight will ensue.

 

Yeah, it would be nice if it could be put to bed one way or the other. I'm pretty ambivalent about it on a few levels. I have no illusions about the dog's breakfast that describes the current access arrangements and amenities. Removing or reducing public vehicles on that road would have many benefits. But I still want to see the whole of mountain plan and design which I think is lacking. Also, having realised slowly over my years in this state how systemic has been the denial and disenfranchisement of past atrocities and of current aboriginal culture I'm now much more sensitive to the aboriginal cultural claim to the mountain. As usual it is only really given a token acknowledgement in the same breath that "but you can't stand in the way of 'progress'" is uttered. Tassie doesn't really do considered and inclusive consultation well. Mostly various lobby groups are working actively to prevent that happening. 'Tis frustrating. More broadly, we are starting to see some real growing pains with our expanding tourism sector. Slapdash operations like "She'll be right Cock Ferries" down at Bruny Island aren't helping.

 

I am mildly opposed to the Hobart cable car. Live here and grew up here and the mountain has always been the scenic "natural" backdrop to the city. The claim that it will be next to invisible when looking up is pretty ridiculous. Would probably reluctantly support it if the pinnacle road was closed or tolled; this would at least boost its necessity and environmental credentials - at the moment its hard to take those arguments too seriously. What hasn't been mentioned here is the proponent needs to build a 2.5km road through the bush up the slope of the mountain to build a base station. The decision before Council may have to wait until after the 2022 Council elections as the project doesn't have the support of a majority of Councillors ( although its always possible someone could change the position they took to the people at the Council elections last year, if they were brave enough to cop the wrath ). State government would be unable to pass Special Legislation either IMO as its governing with an unstable majority.

 

Well, we are getting enough tourists already in Hobart. Some say, too many.

 

https://www.themercury.com.au/busin...rcury&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=editorial

Interesting that the Feds have intervened here. Maybe they had to respond to the query that was sent their way. Given recent Environmental signoff from the (former) Minister's office I'd be tipping the MWCC will likely get the nod to continue if they do a halfway decent job on the assessment. I'm not certain they will be diligent enough but it may not matter. State and Fed libs would be in favour of the proposal I am guessing.

Looking down the list of creatures potentially "theatened" by this proposal I really can't see it to be honest but I guess that's why you have independent mobs to the EIAs. Their expertise should overrule my anecdotes every time.