To The Director, Urban Assessments, Department of
Planning, GPO Box 39,
Sydney NSW 2001
REDWatch
General Submission on North
Eveleigh Concept Plan (MP 08_0015
REDWatch wishes to object to the North Eveleigh Concept
Plan (MP 08_0015) as lodged by the Redfern Waterloo Authority on the following
grounds:
Interface with surrounding community
The RWA’s Built Environment Plan (BEP) (page 51-52)
discusses the need for development on the site to be sympathetic to the
surrounding area in its interface with Wilson Street and Ivery’s lane. The BEP
and the RWA’s North Eveleigh Concept Plan seek to achieve this through the use
of four storeys zoning around that part of the perimeter of the site where
there is an interface with two storey terraces.
The proposed four storey developments along Wilson Street are
much more sympathetic to surrounding residents in the east of the site than in
the west. This is due to the proposed four storey developments being within the
cutting along the edge of the site. The result in the east is that two to three
storeys front the two storey terrace houses in Wilson St. The interface along Wilson St may still
not interface well if all storeys of the buildings are flush with the street
and it is recommended that the top storey of the new developments in the site
be set back to provide a street scape more sympathetic to the roof alignment of
the existing terraces.
Towards the western end of the site there is no cutting
and the land at the end of the site is actually higher than Ivery’s Lane. The
concept plan at this end of the site hence proposes buildings which will not be
as sympathetic to the existing buildings in Wilson St and Ivery’s Lane. The concept plan
should be altered to ensure that there is a uniform interface to the existing Wilson Street
terraces rather than a uniform height along Wilson Street.
While the Concept Plan has placed four storey buildings on
the western side of the site adjoining Ivery’s lane it has placed a six story
building on the western edge of the development which because the site is
higher than Ivery’s Lane has far greater impact in reality than on paper. This
creates an interface with the surrounding built environment which is not in
keeping with the BEP undertaking of a sympathetic interface with the
surrounding buildings.
The concept plan needs to be adjusted to address the
concerns of those in Ivery’s lane. One way of doing this may be to remove some
height from the 6 storey building to the west of the site and redistribute the
FSR onto other buildings which are further away from Ivery’s Lane.
A better solution may be to remove the building all
together and to create a park in this area which will address the lack of green
space within the development. Given that the RWA is requesting the Minister to
use his power to approve development contrary to the planning controls for the
site the Minister should insist on a sympathetic interface around the entirety
of the site.
Heights & Densities
We note that the RWA is seeks the Minister’s approval to
allow higher buildings than permitted in the SEPP and we note also that the
final proposal is within the FSR allowed for the site as a whole. We also note
however that due to the FSR being calculated across the entire site that the
density of the project appears much greater than many expected.
In our view the location of the site and the nature of the
surrounding road and rail networks are major determinants of the appropriate
density on this site. As a result a robust Traffic Impact Statement essential.
REDWatch is of the view that there are significant problems with the TIS and
has made this the focus of a separate submission.
We have no objection to the increase in FSR for the
central entertainment area incorporating the Blacksmith Shop and CarriageWorks provided the traffic impact of patrons
attending performances is addressed. We have proposed in our traffic submission
that this can be addressed by the use of an integrated parking solution for the
site which enables the use of unoccupied commercial and residential parking for
performance patrons. In the absence of such a solution the CarriageWorks and the markets should discourage
patrons use of cars and should not be suggesting that patrons arrive early to
find parking in surrounding streets.
Uses
The Concept Plan is very much about the placement of
buildings within the site rather than what is in the buildings or what they
look like. The concept plan specifically says it is not looking for approval
for a particular mix of residential units or for a set number of parking spots
on the site.
The Concept Plan notes “The potential for some (or all) commercial space on
the site to be occupied by one of the neighbouring universities”
(Page 49) and “The proposed concept Plan
also provides for a range of residential forms which could well be tailored for
student housing, The need for student housing has been raised in consultation
between the University of Sydney and the RWA” (Page 35).
REDWatch also notes that Sydney
University in its Campus 2020
Masterplan includes North Eveleigh as an area
of interest for campus expansion. REDWatch is of the view that this use by the
University may provide a preferable outcome to the development of commercial
and general residential on the site. This is based in large part on the
different mode share associated with the university and the consequent traffic
impact.
The University 2020 Masterplan, which does provide
illustrations of what it might do with the North Eveleigh
site, does raise some issues for the Concept Plan. These include obviously
heritage issues as while the University recognises the RWA historical buildings
its plan on page 20 shows some of them removed.
It is not clear, given the University’s likely desire to
operate a defined campus on the site, how non university related affordable
housing spread throughout the site would function in the long term. The current
affordable housing proposal may work well in an ordinary residential
development but there may be resistance to spreading such affordable housing
throughout a proposed university campus site.
REDWatch supports the provision of affordable student
housing as distinct from student housing which is not governed by the normal
affordable housing guidelines. STUCCO already operates a successful affordable
student housing project nearby and should be considered as a possible supplier.
We do not necessarily support the RWA funding affordable student housing at the
expense of affordable housing for the broader area and would suggest that the
Concept Plan should allow for the provision of affordable housing on the site
but leave the option open as to wether this is affordable housing provided by
the University for students and low paid key workers or part funded by the RWA
as part of its affordable housing programme.
There is concern also based on the recent Erskineville
battle over the proposed Woolworths development that any supermarket
development will potentially bring extra car traffic to the area. It has been
argued that it may not be a good spot for a supermarket given that locals
walking to a supermarket from outside the development will need to carry their
groceries up a hill to get out of the site and hence may prefer to continue to
drive to Broadway where there is parking.
As was found in Erskineville there has to be a careful
analysis of the size of any supermarket proposed with the available target
population to assess its viability of a supermarket without the need to become
a major motor vehicle attractor into the area.
It has been pointed out to us the Woolworths was forced by
the ACCC to divest what is now the Waterloo IGA store in an earlier takeover to
prevent market concentration and that if a supermarket is to be considered that
an Aldi store may meet the needs of many in the area better.
Open Space
There is also concern about the lack of public green space
in the plan and the extra pressure this will put on the already heavily used Hollis Park.
The public spaces proposed on the site are mainly around proposed retail areas
such as the Paint Shop, CarriageWorks
and Blacksmith’s Shop markets and do not lend themselves to use as green space
or play areas.
While the report makes reference to the childcare facility
servicing the needs of children living in the area, there is no current
provision for an area where children can play other than potentially to use the
paved site as a skateboard park. There is also no where for people to be able
to play with their children or pets other than on hard surfaces.
Given the shortage of park land in the inner city it is
imperative that a development such as at North Eveleigh
include a green park space. Green spaces are important to generate oxygen and a
range of amenities.
We have earlier suggested that a solution to the dominance
of the 6 storey building at the western end of the site may be better addressed
by a park being situated in this location.
The department should require the concept plan to include
a children’s playground and a suitable sized green park.
Environmental Footprint
There is concern that the RWA Concept Plan has failed to
lock in strong green initiatives on the site. It currently provides a range of
options that can be adopted by the developer. Meanwhile the City of Sydney is proposing in its
2030 strategy that all major new developments needing to include tri-generation
and other energy saving and green house gas reduction measures so that the city
can meet greenhouse and liveability targets. Currently the RWA Concept Plan has
no such requirements.
We submit that the approved concept plan should require
that the development of the site is consistent with the City of Sydney’s 2030 Sustainable
Sydney Strategy in terms of sustainability and green house gas reduction.
As part of the minimisation of the carbon footprint we
submit that, as proposed for the CUB site, the concept plan should require an
integrated parking solution for the entire site. This would allow parking load
sharing across the different uses on the site as well as allow for future
proofing by allocating space as required rather than on the basis of purchase.
By integrating parking it becomes possible to reduce private car space and
increase car share space as car use changes, it is also possible to fit out
parking areas for gas or electrical charging and over time potentially convert
excess car parking over to alternative uses. All of this becomes much more
difficult if parking is under each building and is sold off with unit titles.
In addition to water retention, harvesting and recycling
the site should also make use of other greening approaches such as roof
gardens. The possibility of exporting services to surrounding residents should
also be examined.
We note that the RWA has proposed a series of draft
undertakings “to be addressed at Project
Application Stage”. The concept plan approval should include
all major undertakings as being given by the proponent and require whoever
develops to develop in accordance with the concept plan undertakings rather
than leaving virtually a blank slate to be negotiated by whoever purchases the
site to undertake the development.
Rather than leaving virtually a blank slate to be
negotiated by whoever undertakes the development, the Concept Plan should lock
in all major undertakings prior to its approval. It can not be assumed that a
buyer of the site will want to build their development to the level of
sustainability required by Sustainable Sydney 2030
Heritage
While we welcome the retention of heritage buildings on
the site we do have concerns about some of the adaptive reuse proposed and the
especially the lack of Heritage Interpretation Strategy at the concept plan
stage for this project.
The concept plan proposes adaptive reuse of the Chief
Mechanical Engineers building for residential use which will involve the
internal subdivision of the building. This building has high historical
significance and should be restored for use as a single unit rather than
subdivided.
We are further concerned about the proposal to build a
tall residential building out to the middle of the paint shop and are of the
view that this adaptive reuse is a significant degradation of the building and
sites historical worth. The existing heritage building envelope should be
retained.
Without a Heritage Interpretation strategy for the site
prior to it being broken up and sold there is nothing to ensure that visitors
to the site will get a comprehensive historical interpretation of the site that
explains the role of the workshops. Retaining some of the buildings by adaptively
reusing them is only one part of the equation; the other is to provide the
necessary historical interpretation that explains the site, its significance
and its linkages to the surrounding area and the history of the state.
Post concept plan approval the site will have to be dealt
with in parts so it is imperative that a Heritage Interpretation Strategy be
produced and approved as part of the concept plan approval. Following the sale
of parts of the site a Heritage Interpretation Strategy for the entire site
will need to be negotiated independently with the RWA which will retain some
areas, the CarriageWorks, the one or
two buyers and possibly the council depending on when public space is
transferred to council.
We strongly recommend that the concept plan not be
approved until it includes an adequate Heritage Interpretation Strategy for the
entire site as detailed in under further work ( page ix) in the Heritage
Impact Statement Concept Plan for north Eveleigh on Behalf of Redfern-Waterloo
Authority by Weir + Phillips April 2008.
In this regard we refer the proponent and the Department
to work by Brian
Dunnett’s submission on the sites heritage issues and tourism
potential for an indication of what we think should be covered within the
Heritage Interpretation Strategy for this site.
REDWatch would like it to be possible for visitors to the
developed site be able to undertake a walk around the site and obtain a good
understanding of the sites industrial heritage and its social significance to
the area and the state. We are of the view this will only be possible if the
Department insists on a Heritage Interpretation Strategy prior to approving the
concept plan.
Conclusion
The RWA’s Concept Plan shows that it possible to meet the
requirements of the DGRs in a number of areas but then leaves it up to whoever
buys the site to determine what level of sustainability and other undertakings
will be given. While this may be good for the seller’s ability to maximise
interest in the site and maximise their return it does not guarantee the best
outcome for the site or for those that live around it.
The Department needs to ensure that what is allowable on
the site interfaces adequately with the surrounding community, has a density
and uses commensurate with its transport accessibility, adequate green parkland
and has suitable minimum requirements in terms of heritage interpretation and
sustainability.
REDWatch hence requests the Department to carefully
consider the adequacy of the proposed concept plan in the areas raised in this
submission and to ensure that the proponent addresses the areas raised.
REDWatch has not made mention in its submission of the
proposed pedestrian cycle bride south of Redfern station as it will be the
subject of a separate application.
It is however imperative that the North Eveleigh site is
not considered in isolation and that there is an integrated evidence based
approach to movements across the area to ensure that all the proposed
developments work together to reinforce one another and address the area’s
issues rather than potentially reinforce separation within the area.
REDWatch is concerned that the concept plan currently does
not include an integrated Movement Infrastructure Study similar to that
proposed by Space Syntax The Pemulwuy Project Aboriginal Housing Company
Movement Infrastructure Report Preliminary Findings 27 October 2007 which
is currently with the your department. The TIS on exhibition is very much a
motor vehicle study and does not go into the full range of movements across the
site and the how those movements will integrate or further separate / isolate
parts of the area.
Given that the Department has required in the DGRs that
the proponent considers the project in the broader traffic context of the
university’s plans in the area, we are of the view that this assessment should
also include the impact of the Department and the RWA’s own changed zonings on
the area and that a study similar to that suggested by Space Syntax should be
undertaken to ensure the maximum connectedness and integration of all the
proposed Darlington and Redfern developments.
We trust the Department will take the issues raised in our
submission into account when determining the outcome and conditions on the
concept plan application MP 08_0015 for the North Eveleigh
site.
For and on
Behalf of REDWatch
Geoffrey
Turnbull
REDWatch
Spokesperson
c/- PO Box 1567
Strawberry
Hills NSW 2012
Ph Wk: (02) 9318 0824
email: mail@redwatch.org.au