IS CYGNET YOUR HOME?
JOIN THE CONVERSATION
Send your comments and suggestions to:
We will post them here after removing any identification details.
We will not pass on any of your details
The comments below were displayed at our consultation day in the Supper Room and attendees were each given 5 stars to award to the ideas that they thought are of merit and had Post-it notes for adding comments. It’s all here just click on “scanned comments” below.
- Why do we need a new street? Mary Street is OK as it is. Traffic and parking is no worse than it used to be. Just a waste of money.
- With the new developments happening in Cygnet and surrounding areas, the number of people and cars is increasing and is bound to increase further. I think the idea of the new street would allow a must better through flow, specially if it is done as a one way system.
The streets will be safer and easier to cross for pedestrians and cyclists. I would hope the new development would include some green spaces for everyone to enjoy, and well though pedestrian access to shops and car park.
A walkway between Burton reserve along the creek to the Showgrounds would be a wonderful addition to our lovely town!
(21/04/21 RB )
- Maybe a fourth option one that does not just loop on an off the main street one that cuts from the bp straight up to tip rd or one which leaves the main street an rejoins after the roundabout ??
(22/04/21 BM – via FB)
- My thoughts exactly BM. These three options are all pretty much the same and I honestly can’t see what they’ll achieve. If the aim is to reduce the number of vehicle in town on the main road, coming out around tip road is the only logical way to go. (23/04/21 BN – via FB )
Thanks for your comments BN and BM. Where would you suggest joining Thorp Street? And then where would the traffic go? A roundabout at the junction with the Esplanade?
- at the corner as u head up the last straight to the tip then it could descend Thorpe street an rejoin channel highway maybe then u r bypassing Cygnet rather than looping on and off the main strip also believe council owns the land don’t quote me on that though
(23/04/21 BN – via FB)
- Thankyou for the opportunity of commenting on options. This, as you say, is a big project for Cygnet and no doubt will take time and may be attended by various hiccups etc.
In the short term the problems of getting across the street could be solved by putting in a couple of crossings and some traffic calming wouldn’t cost much either. I would suggest that crossings will also be needed with any of the new options.
By reducing traffic on Mary St. unfortunately it will actually encourage those inconsiderate, drivers who speed dangerously through the township so measures will be needed to curb their thoughtless and dangerous driving habits.
I wish you all the best with the options
- All of these options are a band aid solution. The road should continue to the roundabout and be the main route through Cygnet. You should turn on to Mary Street from near the top pub. A couple of houses may need to be compulsory purchased.
- With the new commercial zoning along the backs of the current Mary street businesses the road plans need to be designed in the context of the growth of a new commercial strip in Cygnet.
The plans need to consider the needs of the extension to our central business area beyond the needs of us as drivers of cars.
Traffic management and parking is important but so is pedestrian access, the connection between the Main Street and new street.
Civic spaces, street trees, designing a space that meets the needs of a community of people.
There is no plan for much needed parking in central Cygnet. The plans offer potentials and possibilities which is completely inadequate. New business will provide parking for their business purposes.
The Council needs to provide a real parking solution to the current congestion and for the ongoing growth of the town population. None of the three plans that have been put forwards include the extended commercial district.
A plan that includes this newly zoned commercial district needs to be developed. Are there possibilities for pedestrian laneway linkages between the two streets? What potential is there for business development in the rear sections of the current Mary street shops?
The new road and extended commercial district has beautiful views and excellent solar access (it’s sunny) these attributes need to be retained and celebrated in the plans for this area.
There is room for street trees (please planted in the ground and NOT in boxes) and practical, sympathetic landscape design.
- A number of Cygnet residents have spent a lot of time trying to solve this issue over the past 20 years with extensive community consultation and council never acted when opportunities arose to purchase land to enable this chance in the future eg ;buying the land were Jackies Cafe is now.
HVC call us a ‘Village” and we are happy and love our village .
This is not Huonville or Kingston but if we are not super careful here, now that’s what will happen, complete with Woolworths and shopping centre.
I’m fine with road behind town one way or 2 but with green spaces like the first plan not commercial on flood land!
In regards to commercial growth or parking on new street i think if there is is some space on Western side behind existing shops that would be acceptable which wouldn’t visually change the rural look of the place …
I don’t want to move away from here where would I go ???
When does the sprawl stop, how long till we lose all our viable farming land ?
- There are important features in the 2010 endorsed Township plan that allow for access to the rear of Mary street businesses via the new road.
This access is important as it allows delivery trucks to park and offload at the rear of businesses such as the supermarkets and butchers. At present, delivery days (Wednesdays) feature large trucks parking on Mary Street and footpath access being restricted by the presence of pallets of deliveries. The clearances for truck turning and maneuvering needs to be looked at more closely.
The businesses of Mary Street have a right of way to the rear lane way on their property titles. This right of way is currently used in a variety of ways. For example at 22 Mary Street/Balfour House tenants have vehicular access to the rear lane way to exit the property. This is an important traffic safety measure and much reduces the need for vehicles to reverse onto Mary street. Formalisation of this access to the lane way was included in the endorsed 2010 plan and needs to be in any future plan.
The 2010 Township Plan placed the new road along the current right of way and discussed the opportunity for new commercial development to occur in the unused back yards of the Mary Street businesses.
Any new road needs to be sited in a way that maximises parking opportunities.
Running the road through the Town Hall car park does not succeed in this aim.
The potential business zone extends down to the bottom pub but there is no vision for road access to this area.
(03/05/21 CBB )
- Many thanks to the tCA for providing this forum.
The danger of doing what is proposed in the pamphlet is that it the works could be redundant within a few years. I would like to see that any proposed alterations to the Cygnet Town Plan is designed to fit the wider picture. That would require coordination with other responsible authorities.
Subdivision activity along the highway between Kingston and Woodbridge and between Cygnet and Ables Bay is providing for a major population increase south of Hobart, putting stress on those sections of highway and the towns along the way. Mary street currently obstructs traffic flow along the Channel Hwy. With the mainland invasion seemingly focused on the Channel and Huon districts, it is inevitable that the highway will have to bypass Mary street, and provision for this should be included in the proposed amendments.
I would suggest that to accommodate traffic increases, eventually it will be necessary to (a) upgrade Nicholls Rivulet road, significantly shortening the highway, (b) bypass Cygnet avoiding Mary street bottleneck and (c) provide a link between Huonville and New Norfolk to help relieve traffic congestion in Hobart.
- Given the lack of action on this over the last decades, it would be easy to make a half baked response that would be insufficient for the large increase in population predicted for the near and mid term.
I would suggest a bold plan that will cater for Cygnet’s needs well into the future…..at least until our vehicle use declines due to climate and environmental factors.
1. New Street to be an adequate 2 lane road with parking available along its full length. This would avoid the need for a car park in the north and access to shops would be relatively easy.
2. New Street to cross the rivulet and meet the Channel Highway at the Esplanade and be a proper bypass.
3. Clear signage at both ends of the street to adequately indicate the shopping centre and bypass routes. However, because New Street offers parking and easy access to Mary street, perhaps it could be labelled a through road with parking for town…..or something like that……
4. Return the current centre car park to an open space for community activities, events, festivals, markets etc etc, and still use it as a carpark when no particular event is in progress.
5. Use New Street as the through road when events are in progress, closing Mary Street for more space and safety of pedestrians.
I fail to see how this would adversely affect Mary Street businesses, as a traveler using New Street would be well aware of their proximity to the centre of town. Many towns with a bypass have become far more attractive to locals and tourists alike with less traffic in the town centre.
Population in Cygnet and surrounds is predicted to increase at a very high rate. Perhaps infrastructure planning and construction in Cygnet could break the reactive and patch-up mould, and create an even more beautiful and pleasant place to be.
- This new street behind the shops should help reduce the traffic in Mary Street and provide more parking but it seems that Council is not intending to build the new car park that is in the 2010 plan so it would be better to have a wider road reserve to allow for public parking bays.
A one-way loop around the town centre is possibly a good option but the new street has to be wide enough for two way traffic + parking so that Mary Street can be closed to traffic from time to time.
Like others have said this is really a short term fix for the traffic problems in the main street.
As the population in the district grows we might some day need a real by pass and a corridor for this should be reserved in the planning scheme to prevent building making this impossible. Possibly all the way from Slab Road to the Esplanade.
- The Commercial Zone needs a brand new Special Area Plan, to bring planning up to date and relevant for at least the medium 25 year future. Especially now that we have much better climate change data.
The Special Area Plan has to be clever enough to have flexibility built into the space with some sustainable options that favour people over vehicles whilst acknowledging the village needs some more parking space.
The SAP New Road requires a very low traffic speed in its design to favour older pedestrians and children. A wide pedestrian walkway spaced away from the verge with landscaped vegetation/ small trees. Some picnic tables. Access lanes to Mary Street. Interspersed double parking spaced apart. Green space for special events or overflow events which benefit the community.
Development of commercial business should back onto the existing ones and not spread across to the other side of the road. This also makes infrastructure costs much cheaper and centralised.
Rural views kept intact and to prevent continual uncoordinated commercial development destroying the village look and feel.
The new road needs to designed wide enough to be two way , even if it becomes one way, to ensure a dual purpose if required in future, such as if Mary Street closed temporarily.
Mary Street requires some traffic calming devices as soon as possible.
The bigger picture view may well require a full village bypass that becomes a regional planning issue. The new road cannot function as that.
- Hi Guys
Glad to see you doing this. Unfortunately there is nothing new as you say it was 1997 when this was officially floated and since then nothing has happened.
Of concern is why did we have a pedestrian crossing removed for no reason at all.
The plan has merit but not everyone is going to be happy about it but someone has to suck it up and actually do something or we will get nothing happening again.
Unfortunately I have relatives arriving on 16th for the day so I will not be able to attend.
Be well stay well
(11/05/21 DD )
- I am a resident of Cygnet and have a great interest in relieving the vehicle congestion in Cygnet.
Cygnet is such a beautiful town, well known around Tasmania and I feel that the population increase will grow massively in the future. Like everybody, I do not want to see Cygnet change its “town feel” and become a large town and lose its identity. With the proposed future increase in population we have the rare opportunity for early planning to keep the town like it is and keep congestion out of the town, as most people can see it is starting to be a problem even on normal days already.
I feel that all options only allow for current needs and not for future requirements and the expansion of Cygnet. I realise that cost is always relevant but if extra funding is implemented we will be in a position to hopefully have a one-off plan as trying to get more funding in the future will be very difficult after this current allocation.
My comments on your options are as follows:
* I feel that the entrance of New Street should start on the other side of the post office, which would stop any congestion well before it gets into the town centre.
* OPTION 1. The proposed new car park is essential as the need will only increase and it addresses the need for keeping visitors cars out of Main Street.
* OPTION 3. I do not agree that the oneway system would clear the congestion in the future and feel that a 2 way exit out opposite Burtons Reserve is a forward planning way to go.
I do agree that to be able to cut off Mary Street and make it pedestrian traffic only for markets, festivals, etc. is something of a unique idea for our lovely town which will bring even more visitors to the town and shops.
The proposed bypass road needs to be amended in a number of areas, to achieve a more workable result :
1. The road should not exit opposite the Mitre 10 hardware shop, as this is still in town, is too difficult for large vehicles, and is not a practical design.
2. The road should continue behind the Commercial Hotel (“Bottom Pub”) and rejoin the Channel Highway well past the roundabout.
3. This may require the resumption of some residential property, but the benefits of the improved route will far outweigh any additional costs involved.
4. The road reserve needs to be wide enough to provide for parking lanes along both sides of its entire length.
5. The proposed new car park close to the Post Office is far too small, and too far away to be practical.
6. The existing Mary Street car park, and the one behind the Town Hall, are both too small to meet current needs, let alone population growth from new subdivisions.
7. One way traffic flows, and traffic management features should be introduced, to deter large vehicles from entering the town, to reduce traffic flows and to improve pedestrian safety and shopper appeal.
Does Cygnet need a bypass? – NO
Will Cygnet need a bypass in the future? – PROBABLY
Should this new street be designed so that it can be Stage 1 of a future by pass? – YES
Bypass corridors are reserved years in advance to prevent development that would make it impossible later.
For example the Sorrell transport corridor was identified and protected for the bypass in the 1970s. Now it is needed. Good forward planning.
In 50 years time (or less) it’s quite likely that Mary Street will be unable to cope with the amount of through traffic even with this proposed new street.
This transport corridor should be protected now.
Before the more development is allowed.
If the proposed new street to the east of Mary Street is generously proportioned it could later form part of a modest bypass that, when needed, could run from Garthfield Avenue to Charlton Street (Channel Highway).
This would then bypass the town centre completely but, unlike in Ross, it wouldn’t take the through traffic so far from town that people wouldn’t want to stop/shop/visit.
(I am a Cygnet resident and have lived here for more than 25 years)
I hear a lot of people complain about how dangerous it is driving through Cygnet, and often there is no other alternative but to drive there, this could be a great solution if we can get it going.
(13/05/21 DW via Facebook)
Hasn’t this been in the pipeline for 20 years?
(13/05/21 JA via Facebook)
Plan 3 would be great as long as the parking in Mary St is changed into angle parking.
( 13/05/21 MH )
Looking at the options presented, the one thing that stands out is that a one way system would be of great benifit
In theory this would halve the amount of traffic through Mary Street and make it omnidirectional. Just don’t bottleneck it like Liverpool Street in the city.
Anybody arguing that one directional on Mary Street would be inconvenient for those entering from the north, or the south has to think about how they navigate in and out of the town now.
Living south of Cygnet the options for turning round are using the carpark, driving round George Street or a U turn some where along Mary Street. Coming from the north the options are similar, the carpark, the bottom roundabout or a U turn.
A one way system would benifit both directions.
My main concern is that in the usual style of Tasmania, we are having this same conversation in 2031.
I’m delighted that there at last appears to be seriously positive movement towards constructing a new road to the east of Mary Street. And I’m encouraged to hear that the premier has committed to providing sums adequate for the “new street” project to become a comprehensive reality.
1. Abandon the idea that Cygnet needs a car park to the north of the main part of the town (between the Post Office and BP). It strikes me that a northern car park would be massively expensive and inconvenient to both residents of the area and to our increasing numbers of visitors, either private or organisational. By abandoning the idea of a northern car park, this would provide substantial funding for other aspects of the plan to be done better.
2. Make the new road wide enough for two lanes plus parking all along one side of it. The same could be done for Mary Street. Each road should be one-way (the new street running north-south, Mary Street south-north), with the new road comfortably wide enough to be two-way in the event of emergencies. Making each road one-way would take a lot of pressure off pedestrians and would enhance their safety.
3. Use of both streets for parking (several hundreds of parking spots would be available — and the car park behind the Town Hall would still be there) would eradicate entirely the need for the town’s present central carpark (in front of the church). This area, in collaboration with the owner of the land (the Catholic Church) would then provide a generous area for an attractive piazza (or similar) that would very much enhance the township’s heart, and provide a space for social events for all organisations wishing to display their activities and to demonstrate the ways in which they benefit our township. Local traders on the eastern side of Mary Street should be encouraged to provide, if possible, access between the new road and Mary Street.
3. Rather than making the new road enter Mary Street at the southern end opposite the Mitre 10 hardware store, the road should be extended over the rivulet to join the Channel Highway at the Esplanade junction (traffic flow being controlled by a substantial roundabout at that junction). This would pre-empt the need in later years to cope with the intensifying demands of urban growth and road traffic intensity. Imaginative foresight could save the need for a lot of development funding down the track.
4. At this time, the idea of extending the new road to the Esplanade junction might make it look like the beginnings of a total bypass of the commercial heart of Cygnet. However, studies of many such developments on the Australian mainland will tell us that the bypassing of a town — while initially feared by commercial interests that it would reduce trade — has (a) resulted in no commercial loss (often gain); and (b) has allowed the town to be much more amenable to and secure for locals, and more interesting and relaxing for visitors. Cygnet could be a much prettier and attractive town. However, a still tightly congested heart (as would be the result of any of the present options) would not make it easier to achieve these two desirable outcomes.
5. The “parkland” aspect of the 2004 plan, of course, is the most environmentally appealing, and would do much to enhance the natural charm of the township. To be realised, it would require a lot of generosity on the part of the landowners involved, and a lot more imagination and courage on the part of our council. The land is flood-prone, and therefore not of great use for housing or business — but it is a haven for a variety of wildlife, and its proper care could make it an environmentally friendly place and a joy to the eye for all.
Great that these plans are proposed but as a truck driver (Cygnet Water Cartage) and owner of the Commercial Hotel, 2 Mary Street, it would be more beneficial it the road comes out just south of the bridge in Charlton Street.
If larger vehicles wish to continue down Cygnet Coast Road the corner at the bottom service station is easier to turn at than on Mary Street.
The current proposals still leaves larger trucks, buses etc having to cross the center of the road to clear the footpaths when enter back into Mary Street.
Larger combinations vehicles would struggle to complete the turn with out holding up traffic.
Given the recent accident that happen in Melbourne’s south bank this needs to be considered.
We total agree with the first part of the road as it will help with trucks backing into driveways from Mary Street.
At this preliminary stage of thinking about the development of Cygnet it is important to try and put aside notions of cost, possible compulsory acquisition issues, how Cygnet is at the moment, what our village is like, notions of whether or not we should consider changing our village at all – and so on.
We are faced with a rapidly increasing population and, whether we like it or not, we will need to adapt to the changes. This is not about whether we like the idea of change, but rather how we can manage that change. That is, managing the inevitability of change in a manner that will provide the best amenity for the present and future residents of our village.
Realistically we need to accept that Cygnet is a popular tourist destination – and indeed accept that the prosperity which we all enjoy is heavily dependent on the tourist dollar.
In preparing this suggestion I have tried to limit my thinking to five main objectives. There can of course be many others.
To reduce the traffic density in Mary Street.
Improve the available parking.
Open up the plan of Cygnet to facilitate future growth and prosperity of the Central Business District.
To improve the amenity of Mary Street generally.
Consider a possible funding mechanism
Objective (1) To reduce traffic density in Mary Street.
The site of Cygnet is in fact very constrained. This is a natural legacy for a town that simply grew to fill the available space. For practical purposes it now has nowhere to grow. The only realistic solution appears to be to create a by-pass road with the objective of:
Redirecting through traffic. Mary Street between the roundabout and Golden Valley Road would become one way, northbound only
Creating further space for the physical growth of the Cygnet CBD
A by-pass road would facilitate much increased parking and dramatically reduce traffic density in Mary Street.
The by-pass road would create the potential for future commercial development both to the west of the proposed road and within the existing rear of properties fronting Mary Street.
(From a planning point of view the junction of Mary Street and Golden Valley Road is problematic. Mary Street North of that junction would remain two way.)
The by-pass road would open parking development opportunities, whether parallel parking, nose to kerb or in some other configuration. Realistically the owners of existing businesses fronting Mary Street would be very quick to develop the rear of their sites for parking entered from the new by-pass road (Be cognisant that the present car park in the centre of the village is (I understand) owned by St James and the public could be excluded.)
To open up the site of Cygnet for future commercial development. The properties that at present front Mary Street and have no rear access would have street access from the by-pass road and could be developed for commercial use. Also the land to the east of the by-pass road would also be available for potential commercial or other use.
The proposal opens the potential to significantly improve the amenity of Mary Street as a more pedestrian friendly space. The proposal would convert Mary Street to a restricted one way street for cars only, perhaps with parallel kerbside parking. The street could wind a little between the present kerb lines to avoid a straight through appearance. Heavy vehicles would be banned and could access for deliveries from the by-pass road. Access to the St James’ and library car parks would not be affected.
As the Mary Street Road pavement would be reduced in width there some potential for footpath dining and additional planting making Mary Street a much more attractive place. (Mary Street alignment is relatively narrow.)
A possible funding mechanism. Notwithstanding that there is (I understand) a potential funding grant of $5m. This would not be sufficient to meet the construction and acquisition costs. The balance would need to come from either further grants or rate income. A modest rate increase against the business properties in the Cygnet CBD would be sufficient to provide the cash flow to service a construction loan. This would be appropriate. The likely increase in the value of these properties and their income potential would more than justify the rate adjustment.
There may well be other funding mechanisms.
This was the last of the submissions received during the formal consultation process and so able to be displayed in the Supper Room on the 16th.
Further comments are welcome.
My family have lived in Cygnet for the past 5 generations, and it has certainly changed.
However we feel there should definitely needs to be a new street, as Mary Street gets so congested it is dangerous, especially for the elderly.
We think the new plan needs more work, it would be much better if the street finished at the Thorpe Street intersection with a Round about.
Bringing the bypass Street out where it is suggested would not be an improvement at all it would just cause a bottle neck in the town.
Please consider the best options before wasting money and making it worse that it already is.
(17/05/21 SD )
CYGNET TOWNSHIP PROPOSAL
PEDESTRIAN MALL AND BY-PASS
• Pedestrian Mall from Town Hall to Golden Valley Rd
• 2 way By-Pass starting north of BP meeting Channel Hwy near Burtons Reserve, on-street parking in section behind businesses
• Link main car park internally to Library car park
• Link George St to Lourds Rise for a local west-east connector (Golden Valley Rd to Channel Hwy) and west-south (Golden Valley Rd to Lymington Rd) connector
• Link George St to Mary St via existing lane south of St James College
• Access to Cygnet from the north will be via a Right Turn from the new by-pass between the Post Office and BP
(19/05/21 JH & HS)
The plans currently being considered were designed to meet circumstances that pertained and were foreseen at that point in time, but are clearly inadequate to meet current and most certainly future needs. In particular, the entry/exit locations make no sense considering the anticipated increase in traffic load.
The New Street northern entry/exit needs to be located at a currently existing intersection, such as Frederick Street and Garthfield Streets, provided with a roundabout, and the southern end most sensibly utilising the existing roundabout at Lourdes Road.