would call for expressions of interest from around the world for the
project.
COMMENT
Building big things over rail lines is an idea that has been
around for decades – but its time may now have arrived. The O’Farrell
government’s plan to throw open development rights for that wide scar of
open railway track between Central and Redfern looks like a good idea,
even if it is one that is easier planned than executed.
The space is not doing anything at the moment. And unless
you’re a member of Sydney’s claque of train junkies, all that rail track
is not really much to look at.
Putting apartments and shops above it – and, maybe even more
importantly, establishing walkways and corridors to connect the two
sides of the track – makes intuitive planning sense.
But the government’s loose sketch of a proposal, released on
Friday by Planning Minister Brad Hazzard, raises more questions than –
well, not answers, because there are none.
Does this mean, for example, the community needs to wait for a
private developer to start cashing in on apartments before anybody
upgrades Redfern Station, the main transport connection to Sydney
University, which remains scandalously without disabled access?
And how will the proposed developments interact with other public transport proposals through the area?
For as long as governments have been planning a second rail
crossing of Sydney Harbour, they have planned for that crossing to
surface on the eastern side of Redfern Station.
The O’Farrell government says it wants to build this second
harbour crossing, but there is no mention of another rail line on the
maps it published on Friday.
And how high will developers have to build above the rail tracks to start to justify their outlays?
The construction standards for building above rail are particularly taxing in Sydney – and justifiably so.
The Granville rail disaster of 1977, in which a train
collided with the supports of a bridge that then fell on the train,
explains why this is the case.
It also explains why making money out of building above train lines often means the buildings have to go a long way up.
There’s plenty more to wonder about.
Does the proposed “high density neighbourhood” on Broadway
now justify continuing Gladys Berejiklian’s George Street light rail
down towards Sydney University?
The decision not to build to Sydney University, of course, was made before this latest mega-proposal.
And with all these new apartments proposed for Redfern, maybe
the state should now start work on a light rail line to that other
development bonanza – Green Square – on a corridor that Sydney City
Council has already secured?
All these questions really boil down to one big one: how is
the community to have confidence that, in return for selling off its
development rights, it will get what it needs in return?
Hazzard’s maps include plenty of dotted lines marked “pedestrian/cycle connection”.
This is a government, remember, that is happily fast-tracking
a harbourside casino but is yet to approve one “pedestrian/cycle
connection” worth talking about.
Hazzard’s idea is worth tossing out there. But it is best to take little on trust.