cable car and pinnacle centre on mt wellingon hobart

[wayno]

sorry , the "proposed pinnacle centre"

[fenlok]

radio waves can damage the health,, i'd be more worried if i had to work at the pinnacle centre. the odd visit isnt likely to affect your health
http://www.chronicexposure.org/transmitters.html

Yeah, that's what i was thinking along the lines of. Visitors, fine, but working there would be pretty damn risky. Recall the (relatively) recent case in Brisbane of the cluster of similar cancers at the old ABC studios in Toowong.

Like Strider mentions, it may depend on the location etc., though disregarding it totally as it's 'only radio interference' wouldn't be wise on the part of the developer considering the above.

[wayno]

how are you going to hide the building from the transmission, radio waves are broadcast in a pretty wide arc and you don't even need to be in line of site to be affected by them.. you'd might have to proof the building against Electromagnetic fields to be sure to stop excessive radio waves...
i used to work next to a tv station,
a telco engineer was in the building one day he saw the transmitters next door, he tole me we should be worried about the radiation they put out, mind you one transmitter was a dish pointed in our direction.....

[Nuts]

I should say thanks for your contribution AB (mwcc-director)

[Happy Wanderer]

As a life-long bushwalker (no political or lobby group affiliation, no facebook, no twitter....!) I am concerned that the major push for the cable car has come from people who appear to have a limited understanding of the bushwalkers' perspective.

For instance, why put walker registration facilities at the Pinnacle when the logical site is the Springs from where the majority of tracks leave, or through which walkers pass on their way to higher level tracks? Only two of the multitude of tracks on Mt Wellington are located anywhere near the Pinnacle.

Any claim that the cable car would be a boon for walkers is a myth. Park the car at the cable car terminus, ride to the top, then what?? Lost World, Collins Bonnet, Pulpit Rock, Thark Ridge, Panorama Track are well away from the Pinnacle, and even the walks that do pass near the Pinnacle (Zigzag/Organ Pipes Track, South Wellington/Icehouse Track) all finish either at the Chalet or at the Springs. Are walkers expected to end their day with some kilometres of fire-trail walking (sharing with the bikers) and pavement pounding to return to their cars?

The argument that the Pinnacle is already defaced (or trashed, as one prominent person said in the media) by structures so another few won't make any difference is akin to saying that, since the roadsides in Tasmania are already badly littered, you are justified in adding more.

The observation building has been regularly used as an example of what shouldn't be constructed, but I'm sure many would remember the protestations from its developer and architect that it would be barely visible from the city, that the design was discreet, that it would blend in with the environment. Sound familiar?

For those who denigrate Mt Wellington as a second-rate walking experience, I suggest you look at Peter Dombrovskis' book 'On the Mountain' to remind yourselves of what is there to see and experience. I still have 'Dombrovskis moments' where the proximity of the city is secondary to what the Mountain is offering.

[north-north-west]

Gets pretty cold and nasty up there, im not sure the average tourist would even WANT to get out of the car 75% of the time!!

Kuranda Skyrail has enclosed stations, they'd do the same thing here. You'd have a fully enclosed walkway from the top station to the visitors' centre and the lookout. That way the loopies get the views without any discomfort.

[Strider]

For instance, why put walker registration facilities at the Pinnacle when the logical site is the Springs from where the majority of tracks leave, or through which walkers pass on their way to higher level tracks? Only two of the multitude of tracks on Mt Wellington are located anywhere near the Pinnacle.

Perhaps a step towards developing that multi-day walk that was proposed a little while ago?

[Happy Wanderer]

Perhaps a step towards developing that multi-day walk that was proposed a little while ago?

Somehow I doubt it - there is no mention of it on the MWCC website. In fact bushwalkers are just not mentioned; only walkers on the road.

[Strider]

Aside from the cable-car debate, you certainly raise some good points re: bushwalkers in relation to the proposed Pinnacle Centre. But what impact do you see the PC might have on bushwalkers? Any?

[Happy Wanderer]

But what impact do you see the PC might have on bushwalkers? Any?

The details of the proposed Pinnacle Centre are so fuzzy it is impossible to really say. Where would it be located? What size would it need to be to cater for the numbers that MWCC claims it could carry (800 per hour)? I would have serious concerns about the weight of numbers and the potential for issues such as littering and degradation of the pinnacle area vegetation.

I have been snow-shoeing near the summit in the morning before the crowds arrive and had clear views over to Mt Arthur with waterfalls of cloud tumbling down through the saddle - it would be awful to have that view interrupted by more man-made structures, and until I see what is proposed, like everyone else, I have to make assumptions.

[vagrom]

The MWCC's website is very professionally presented. They clearly mean business. But then:

"No 'Scar' here! Don't buy the lies. ...It's 1950's socialist Russia, with a killer view."

Leaving out tacky bits like this might help their cause.

"Socially Inclusive". Well umm, yeah. That has to be a winner.

[Strider]

But what impact do you see the PC might have on bushwalkers? Any?

The details of the proposed Pinnacle Centre are so fuzzy it is impossible to really say. Where would it be located? What size would it need to be to cater for the numbers that MWCC claims it could carry (800 per hour)? I would have serious concerns about the weight of numbers and the potential for issues such as littering and degradation of the pinnacle area vegetation.

I have been snow-shoeing near the summit in the morning before the crowds arrive and had clear views over to Mt Arthur with waterfalls of cloud tumbling down through the saddle - it would be awful to have that view interrupted by more man-made structures, and until I see what is proposed, like everyone else, I have to make assumptions.

I am also a regular user and lover of Mt Wellington. However, I think I would be more happy to let the crowds have Mt Wellington instead of some of the other more spectacular parts of our state.

Mt Wellington is Hobart's biggest tourist attraction, but both Hobart and the tourists are missing out. The game does need to be lifted somewhat.

[Strider]

The MWCC's website is very professionally presented. They clearly mean business. But then:

"No 'Scar' here! Don't buy the lies. ...It's 1950's socialist Russia, with a killer view."

Leaving out tacky bits like this might help their cause.

That is just bizzare...

[frenchy_84]

You've confused me vagrom, where does their website mention socialist russia? or is that you don't believe their statement of no scar and suggesting the development is like one from the socialist era?

[vagrom]

Frenchy. I'm using the link left at the bottom of the post of 4/3 at 5;01pm. Hover over the top bar's "Proposal" option and click on "Facilities". Read the first box : Visitor and Interpretation Centre.

First I read about "the lies" and was reminded of Pedder/Franklin times. (Then I looked up Agitprop). It's interesting to see the MWCC (ex-Hob.CC) present it's case with the added assurance that no public offering is anticipated. That is, they are confident and have private backers lining up.
But when the opening presentation refers to the "lies" of some interested parties, then you know that MWCC envisages a robust form of consultation. Just how confident are they?

And the reference to the little, old cabin that has minimally protected visitors over many years, as representative of 50's socialist Russia, might seem to suggest ... That's it ! Greens under the bed. (Well, that's a change I suppose.)

But no. It's a very smart presentation apart from those gliches. The conceptual animations of the cable cars remind me of scenes from Where Eagles Dare. Still, they have to make it look flash.

[north-north-west]

They must be wanting to get this project up and running on the 'build it and they will come' theory ...

The thing is, they won't.
People who are already in Hobart for whatever reason will use it, many visitors to the island would probably be interested enough to detour down to have a ride (once) if they hear about it, but no-one's going to go all the way to Southern Tassie from elsewhere in the world, or even from the mainland, just for a cable-car ride, however pretty the view is.

I'm not necessarily opposed to it, but I really can't see it being economically viable. While one has to accept the occasional environmental sacrificial lamb, there has to be enough of a return to justify it, and I doubt there would be with this. It would have to be part of a major, widescale development and promotion; if you want tourists, you have to give them plenty of reasons to come, and plenty to do while they're here. OK, build up the MTB facilities and promote them. Kunanyi isn't really a place for serious bushwalking - it's family daywalks, weekend relaxtion and easy tracks for wannabes - so push that side of it. Snowshoeing when the weather permits? Maybe. Maybe even XC skiing - I know people used to quite a bit, maybe still do, though the snow's not reliable or generally long-lasting. Plus the Alpine/Antarctic Garden thing.
You need a wide cross-section of activities and drawcards keep attracting people. And you need to let them know it's there. And all of that takes a lot of $$$ to set up in the first place, and to maintain, and if the visitor numbers aren't sufficient, that's a lot of wasted money.

[Happy Wanderer]

I am also a regular user and lover of Mt Wellington. However, I think I would be more happy to let the crowds have Mt Wellington instead of some of the other more spectacular parts of our state.

Mt Wellington is Hobart's biggest tourist attraction, but both Hobart and the tourists are missing out. The game does need to be lifted somewhat.

So Mt Wellington is to be the sacrificial lamb? What then? Many visitors and locals appreciate the fact that within a very short distance of the city you can be away from crowds. If this changes there may be a spread of those people further afield in search of the values that Mt Wellington once offered. At what point should the line be drawn?

I'm not sure what you mean by Hobart and tourists 'missing out', but if the crowds were to 'have' the mountain many others, locals and visitors alike, would then 'lose' it.

[walkinTas]

They must be wanting to get this project up and running on the 'build it and they will come' theory ...

The thing is, they won't.
People who are already in Hobart for whatever reason will use it, many visitors to the island would probably be interested enough to detour down to have a ride (once) if they hear about it, but no-one's going to go all the way to Southern Tassie from elsewhere in the world, or even from the mainland, just for a cable-car ride, however pretty the view is.

The people that this will appeal to are looking for the urban wilderness experience. A lot of them arrive in Hobart on cruise ships. So yes, people who are already in Hobart because they got off a cruise ship. Hobart is definitely in the business of attracting cruise ships. One would think that attracting more ships and attracting a high(er) percentage of current visitors to the mountain, would definitely be in the project's scope.

I think it's true to say cruise ships make their port decisions based on the total package. The more attractions / experiences the better. The more diverse those attractions the better. As a tourist experience, a trip in a cable car, a meal at a restaurant and a view with several kodak moments, is far more rewarding that a taxi trip to the top of the mountain. And infinitely more sellable.

The real trick will be to minimise visual and environmental impact. People are more likely to support a proposal that has very low visual impact on the area. Very few (hopefully no one) will support a proposal that has high environmental impact.

[Rob A]

Believe they ditched the cable car idea in favour of the sleeker monorail.

Monohobart.jpg (131.81 KiB) Viewed 20585 times

[Overlandman]

From the Mercury News Paper

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasma ... 6794665284

MT Wellington is open for business, with a new management plan allowing for a wide range of commercial development, including a controversial cable car.
The Wellington Park Management Plan, which took effect this week, opens the gates to commercial development at the pinnacle and The Springs.
The tourism industry has welcomed the potential for new drawcards at the Hobart landmark, which attracts more than 350,000 visitors every year.

Tourism Industry Council Tasmania boss Luke Martin said the plan was "overdue, historic and very welcome".
"It creates the possibility of a whole series of new markets on the top and at The Springs," Mr Martin said.
The plan allows for a visitor centre, interpretation centre, viewing shelter cafe, restaurant and take-away food premises, bus terminal, council depot, shuttle buses, cable cars and aerial ropeways, and funicular rail and cable-rail systems.
There has been no commercial development on the mountain since a health spa and chalet were destroyed by bushfire at The Springs in 1967.
Mr Martin said there was great potential for tourism development on the pinnacle.
"We have 350,000 tourists going to the summit each year, with no economic activity out of them," he said.
"There is a market for something on the summit to vastly improve what's there now.
"Even if the cable car doesn't happen, we will still get something." Environment, Parks and Heritage Minister Brian Wightman said the plan allowed for a range of developments in the park, including a cable car.
"The new plan strongly promotes the development of new visitor services and infrastructure on Mt Wellington, but also ensures its special values are protected," he said.
Developments specifically allowed at The Springs include a backpacker hostel, bed and breakfast establishment, holiday cabin, residential hotel, walkers bunkhouse/hut and cable-rail systems.
While the plan allows for commercial development at The Springs and the pinnacle, Wellington Park Management Trust chairwoman Christine Mucha said the trust preferred major development to be centered at The Springs.
"We would like to see The Springs developed and Hobart City Council would like to see it developed," she said.
"It is the central point to start walks and bikes and it is lacking facilities." Hobart developer Ali Sultan's approval for a visitor centre, restaurant and carparking at The Springs expires next month.
Hobart Lord Mayor Damon Thomas said no one could do anything at The Springs until that lapsed.
"The playing field opens up but not until that happens," Ald Thomas said.
The new plan was "a big step forward," Ms Mucha said.
"It was two years in the making and before the Planning Commission for nine months.
It's not just about Mt Wellington, it's the whole mountain range, Glenorchy and crown land." Greens environment spokeswoman Cassy O'Connor said talk of development on the pinnacle was disturbing.
"It's disappointing and disturbing to hear the state's Environment Minister talking up inappropriate development such as a cable car on Mt Wellington," she said.
"Brian Wightman knows very well that any cable car on the mountain would damage its natural and cultural values."
Cable car proponent Adrian Bold said his group had waited for the plan to be ratified before taking the next step with their cable car vision.
They will have a proposal launch next month, a second round of public consultation and the plans before the council by mid-year, he said.
"We are very excited the plan is finally ratified," he said.

[wayno]

The plan allows for a visitor centre, interpretation centre, viewing shelter cafe, restaurant and take-away food premises,

put a takeaway outlet up there and you're going to have a litter problem all along the road.... and around the top of the mountain

[Strider]

I might have said it before, but anything at the pinnacle is better than the cold excuse for a visitor center that currently sees more duty as a public toilet.

[Drifting]

I hate to agree with it, but better Mt Wellington, which is already befouled, than more pristine places. A multi-day walk would be smart, as well.

I reckon Peter Dombrovskis' ghost is going to haunt the developers though.

[Strider]

There has been a proposal put forward for a multi a day walk from the pinnacle to the snowy range.

[stepbystep]

For those interested. A public forum.

Respect the Mountain - No Cable Car
Presents: A Public Forum Q&A
Alternatives to a Cable Car on Mt Wellington (Kunanyi)

At Hobart Town Hall on Wednesday 26 February from 12.30 - 1.30pm

Guest Speakers:
Scott Bacon
Cassy O'Connor
Elise Archer
Geoff Law
& a representative from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre

For further information please call Jason Turvey 0415 678 548

ENTRY IS FREE - Gold coin donations welcome.

[frenchy_84]

Mt Wellington Cable Car Company are having their proposal launch on the 16th of April.

[north-north-west]

For those interested. A public forum.

Respect the Mountain - No Cable Car
Presents: A Public Forum Q&A
Alternatives to a Cable Car on Mt Wellington (Kunanyi)

At Hobart Town Hall on Wednesday 26 February from 12.30 - 1.30pm

Guest Speakers:
Scott Bacon
Cassy O'Connor
Elise Archer
Geoff Law
& a representative from the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre

For further information please call Jason Turvey 0415 678 548

ENTRY IS FREE - Gold coin donations welcome.

I will be there in spirit

[tastrax]

There has been a proposal put forward for a multi a day walk from the pinnacle to the snowy range.

I think this has now been dropped in favour of just walks on the mountain. I will see if I can find the report from the investigating committee

[north-north-west]

There has been a proposal put forward for a multi a day walk from the pinnacle to the snowy range.

I think this has now been dropped in favour of just walks on the mountain. I will see if I can find the report from the investigating committee

Pity. A walking track that went all the way over Wellington, the Snowy & Jubilee Ranges, Mueller and The Needles would have been wonderful. As long as they kept the horse riders and mountain bikers off it, of course.

[icefest]

Pity. A walking track that went all the way over Wellington, the Snowy & Jubilee Ranges, Mueller and The Needles would have been wonderful. As long as they kept the horse riders and mountain bikers off it, of course.

It could always be done as an off track expedition... I'm shuddering just imagining all the scrub.