I was intrigued by Bill Dempsey’s letter ‘Compromise option for our CBD debate’ as it presents a number of subtexts that I believe should be addressed.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
To begin with, Bill’s logic appears to run like this: Inverell Shire Council wants a median strip, whereas the “antagonists” want to retain the London Plane trees. Problem solved if both options were combined thus allowing for a canopied CBD such as Peel St in Tamworth. The problem though as I see it is this: Bill underestimates the ISC’s antipathy towards the Plane trees. When David Tooby was contracted to create a TCRP his brief entailed a directive that any trees recommended were not to include Plane trees.
Bill also sidesteps the issue as to why the ISC wants to have a median strip in the first place. He appears to assume that trees placed in the median point are one way to beautify a town, but is this factor really what has motivated the ISC?
The fact is that the idea of a TCRP was first mooted by Brett McInnes in a Roads and Traffic Committee back in December 2012, where he raised concerns about the wear and tear on roads due to peak hour traffic. From his recommendation for a TCRP, it can be inferred that within that context, the ISC opted for a median strip to reduce traffic flows rather than for reasons to do with beautification.
I admire Bill’s curiosity and resolve by approaching Tamworth Regional Council for information (would our own council have conducted such research!) but he assumes (rightly or wrongly) that the Peel St makeover has been an unqualified success.
Sure it looks wonderful – more trees are always better than less, but has it improved the economic position of the retailers? Anecdotal evidence would suggest not entirely. Since 1997 Myer has left, Narnia Bookshop has closed as well as many more. The reason for this? In part because cars have been diverted to outlying parking bays as well as encouraged to park near far-flung shopping-malls.
Bill’s comments pre supposes two things: one is that the “antagonists” are the ones who can’t compromise, whereas in fact this situation could be levelled at the ISC itself.
The other is ironically revealed in Bill’s solution, which is that in presenting one (whether viable or not) he highlights what should have been done at the outset: ISC undertaking research of neighbouring towns and forums made available where people like Bill could present their opinions.
Let’s hope that the ISC will acknowledge such systemic problems when CIRA submits its petition to the council on February 25.
Caroline Wilson
Chairperson of CIRA