new norfolk town plan

Hudson statue and master plan up to council this week

THE New Norfolk town centre master plan will be the subject of a special council meeting this week after a lack of councillors prevented a decision being made about it at the monthly meeting in December. With two councillors absent from the meeting and another two stepping out after declaring conflicts of interest, mayor Ben Shaw had no choice but to let the matter lay on the table.

A council officer had recommended that the New Norfolk Draft Concept Urban Design Plans for the Town Centre and Precinct Connections be adopted, with a specific recommendation that the proposed statue of football great Peter Hudson be located in Arthur Square.

But the meeting was left without a quorum when councillors Natasha Woods and Paul Belcher left the room after declaring conflicts of interest, and councillors Martyn Evans and Jessica Cosgrove were absent. After a discussion about what constituted a quorum, Cr Shaw told the meeting there were insufficient numbers and the matter could not be dealt with at that time.

The same report will be presented to a special meeting on Wednesday night. The public remains excluded from this meeting under the council’s coronavirus precautions.

Developed by consultants Inspiring Place, the 82-page master plan is intended to guide future improvements to High St, and connections to other parts of the town including Willow Court, Tynwald Park, the Esplanade and the sports precinct on the northern side of the river. Its most controversial recommendation was that a proposed statue of Peter Hudson be placed on Arthur Square at the corner of High and Stephen streets.

The consultants acknowledged that placing the statue at Arthur Square was the only aspect of the plan that did not attract majority support. They did not back away from this recommendation, but suggested that the statue form part of a future “Local Heroes/Achievers/Champions interpretative walk.”

Concept design for Arthur Square, New Norfolk, prepared for the Derwent Valley Council by consultants Inspiring Place.

Among the many other recommendations published for community consultation, the plan proposed the removal of an unspecified number of parking spaces in High St and the planting of trees at pedestrian crossing points, and in the middle of the street; removal of some parking spaces in Hackett St for a wider footpath, seating and trees; upgrading the walkway to Laskeys Car Park and reconfiguring that car park, relocating its bus shelter and building public toilets

The plan also recommended removal of the council chambers car park and planting trees; converting Circle St angle parking to right-angle; and traffic calming and pedestrian crossings across Richmond St. In Burnett St it recommended the removal of some parking spaces; widening the foothpath on the eastern side; and viewing and interpreting the underground convict-built infrastructure. Also proposed were traffic lights at the intersection of Burnett and George streets, and the construction of car parks on the Frescati House lawn and on the bank outside Willow Court perimeter wall.

The plans for Arthur Square included widening the diagonal footpath, adding a new footpath from the toilets to the rotunda, and constructing a footpath around the perimeter of the square; rebuilding the toilet block; removing the fountain and central hedges and replacing with plaza and water play feature; building a second small rotunda; widening the kerbs on Pioneer Ave side; removing the pioneers wall to the Esplanade; consolidating the flower beds and removing perimeter plantings.

In response to the feedback received, the consultants recommended the following actions to be included in the final version of the plan:

  • The Peter Hudson statue be located within Arthur Square as part of a future Local Heroes/Achievers/Champions interpretative walk and the concept plans be revised to show this outcome;
  • The number and location of the designated disabled parking spots be reviewed before the plans are finalised;
  • Review the location of the path and ornamental beds within Arthur Square to allow for the two memorial garden beds
  • Revise the concept plans to show a preference for the toilets to be designed to cater for separate male and female toilets with provision for a unisex wheelchair access toilet and inclusion for a baby change room;
  • Revise the draft concept plans to indicate the intention to upgrade pedestrian lighting on High Street and indicate the desire for lighting along The Avenue (for both vehicle and pedestrian use in the future);
  • Review car parking spaces along High Street and particularly on the raised pavement near the Post Office.

11 Comments

  1. There may not be a majority of people in the ballot that occurred to support Peter Hudson’s Statue being placed in Arthur Square. However the 42% of respondents that said emotively that they loathed the idea of placing Peter Hudson’s statue there DO NOT COMPRISE A MAJORITY EITHER!

    I query strongly the motivation of the lobbyists who are still trying to prevent this hero’s statue the being placed where it should be.

    Not all of us are lucky enough to have children that end up excelling in the AFL like Peter Hudson did ….

    So please councillors DO NOT LET THESE BITTER PEOPLE SWAY YOU.

    The spoilers!

    The antagonists!

    People will get used to it once it’s there.

    AFL fans will come from miles away to see it.

    Go away spoil sports.

    I too had a letter in the Mercury supporting Peter Hudson …

    You naysayers can’t have it all your way.

    You SPOILERS GO TO THE THEATRE ROYAL AND WATCH THE BALLET IF YOU WANT

    Peter Hudson is a New Norfolk home town hero

    Shame on you spoilers!

    YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND YOU STAND CONDEMNED FOR TRYING TO TEAR DOWN A HERO LIKE SO FEW!

  2. It should be noted that the emotive language referred to was introduced by the survey, which asked people whether they either LOVED the idea; could LIVE with the idea; LOATHED the idea; or were not sure.
    In the case of the statue, 21% of people said they LOVED the idea of it being placed at Arthur Square; 21% per cent said the could LIVE with the idea; 43% said they LOATHED the idea; and 15% were not sure. There was no opportunity to provide any other answer.

  3. Who authorized such a biased survey question?
    How can they justify such wording?
    More Marketing than substance.

    1. Simon is correct

      So is the Editor who corrected me last night .

      The loathe word is emotive …. but I argue as does Simon ….. it seems …. should not have even been in the survey

      Survey should have been

      Do you support Peter Hudson’s Statue being placed in Arthur Square or not ?

      Yes or no ?….

      Simple stuff

      Only other option

      UNDECIDED !!

      Thus reducing the capacity of people that HATE or LOVE football to go to town on this ….

      I’m pretty sure that New Norfolk produced a World Champion Back Gammon player

      Back in the day ?

      I ask ?

      Should their statue stand alongside Peter Hudson’s or simply REPLACE IT ….

      Or another angle ..

      Peter Hudson , please hop into a Time Machine and unkick all those goals and unmark all those marks !!!

      That’s obviously what’s offended all these Anti-Football Types that don’t want his statue sullying Arthur Square .

      FYI …… I love Aussie Rules !!!!
      I also love Ballet & Backgammon .

  4. Why can’t Peter Hudson’s statue reside at the Boyer Oval…it’s an appropriate spot for a football legend’s likeness….
    Not unlike David Boon at Bellerive..

  5. Arthur Square is not the appropriate place for a football icon. Not everyone in New Norfolk is a football fanatic nor are visiting tourists who are looking for information of historical interest. The Square is a more suitable place for historical figures who have contributed to the establishment of New Norfolk as a town. Sporting champions should be celebrated and remembered in appropriate places. ie. in the case of Peter Hudson, outside the Football Club where loyal fans can see the statue on a regular basis. If the statue was more appropriately sited at the football club there would be far less opposition.

  6. Arthur Square is not the place for the PH statue, most sporting statues are located within the area of their sport, therefor Boyer Oval area would be a much better place or even the Fitzgerald Reserve, improving the garden there too. Please don’t remove the water fountain also. Disabled parking is hugely lacked in the top end of High St, I believe Council needs another carpark rather than converting already strained parking in Circle St. Perhaps angled parking in George St opp RSL would be more suitable and safer for those leaving Tank St.

  7. The debate that has flowed so freely on this topic is to be celebrated . Democracy and freedom of speech in all its glory , showcased in the Derwent Valley News !!

    Hallelujah !!

    I take the opportunity to sincerely apologise to anybody whom I may have offended with any of my recent words in previous postings .

    I simply love Aussie Rules as do so many others . I have a genuine fear of a phenomenon called REVERSE DISCRIMINATION . Whereby small lobby groups ( minorities ) become so loud , that they seek to overturn majority norms . It’s called Aussie Rules for a reason .

    Further , in the late 1980’s the previously healthy TFL was mangled and amalgamated into a slipshod Statewide Structure . The former very healthy regional leagues TFL , NTFA and NWFU were butchered , and in mine and many other peoples opinions , the State League as evidenced by comparatively minuscule crowds , has never really worked .

    I was at the 1979 Grand Final at North Hobart , and there were a tick and only a tick under 25,000 there to watch Peter Hudson’s last appearance in a TFL Grand Final , albeit a losing one for him .

    Yes

    Many Bronze Statues appear at many sporting venues around Australia . Including Daryl Baldock’s at Latrobe Oval . However , Boyer with respect , though a large footy ground is currently somewhat dilapidated in terms of car parking and amenities . And it is not near the town centre as Arthur Square is .

    For Heavensakes !!…… is the Mayor trying to thrust a Godzilla Type Monstrosity on The New Norfolk community . Dwarfing the surrounds , and potentially terrifying small children ?

    No ….. it’s just an average sized statue of a champion at his trade ……..

    Is Huddo that ugly ?

    Poor Bloke …. I always thought he was ruggedly handsome ?

    I can’t wait to be at the unveiling of the statue in Arthur Square , whenever that occurs and would be happy to discuss my support of the statue with any of the people that don’t want it placed there .

  8. The location of a statue is not a race thing, or a white thing or a football thing.
    Its a DVC power trip thing.

  9. I took the time to do the community walk with the consultants. It was the whole street.

    The first half hour was taken up by the powerful proponents FOR the statute placement in Arthur Square.

    What then ensued when a opponent of the idea expressed his opinion was intimidation and bullying! Having someone bellowing and waving a rolled up document right in your face was confronting to all.

    The two designers failing to take control and call it out made me act!

    I, almost 2 feet shorter than this “bully”, walked over to him, put my handbag between his ‘big paper stick’ and the opponents face, shook my finger at him and told him “he was being a bully”. Just like having to do to my teenage son.

    Funnily enough four of these proponents did not continue on the street walk. They were only interested in the statute placement not the streetscape plan.

    The rest of the group went on the walk to council chambers and it was lovely.
    A group of local people who are interested in positive development of our beautiful valley with a very diverse range of exciting ideas.

    Thank you to those community members.

  10. That last alleged scenario sounds awful Leah .

    Importantly, and cowardly, Peter Hudson was KING HIT in the 1971 VFL Grand Final , whilst playing for Hawthorn against St Kilda .

    This was in the days before 3 umpires and much better camera footage of these wicked incidents .

    Thankfully the game has cleared up a lot since those days .

    I never ever heard of Peter Hudson being called a dirty footballer . He was a good sport .

    This is another reason why New Norfolk citizens should be proud to have his statue in Arthur Square , as it surely will be .

    I’ll be only to happy to attend its unveiling , and I am a big bloke , so I will on guard to protect anybody from bullying from either side .

    I think a big communal cuddle is in order .

    I hope Huddo is their as well .

    I want his autograph .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

LIKE THIS ARTICLE? SHARE ON SOCIAL MEDIA

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on email
Email
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

Local Weather

COVID-19 Advice and Links

Latest headlines

Filter by topic

New Norfolk News Archive

RSS Tas articles feed