The Government wants to rip over $30 million in levies out
of the project and could take as much as $100 million—a move that has come at
the last minute with no formal prior notice, and with the unpalatable result that
the density of the high-rise buildings on the site will significantly increase.
This looks like the Cross City Tunnel all over again—the
Government seeking up front fees in exchange for controls that benefit the
developer but are contrary to the public interest. The proposed 5,000 square
metre public park and $3 million community centre will be jeopardised.
The City relied on Redfern Waterloo Authority officer’s advice that the State Government would separately
negotiate an affordable housing levy for the Redfern-Waterloo area. The
Minister now wants this included in the Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA)
negotiated by the City and the government-controlled Central Sydney Planning
Committee (CSPC).
While that levy was expected to be around three per cent of
the development value, it now appears that the Minister is considering a much
higher level, compromising the VPA and the intended public benefits.
The Minister for Planning has set up the City negotiations
to fail, to justify the Government getting their hands on the cash. Just this
week, Fosters confirmed with my office it was ready for a public announcement,
but the Government’s shameful late
intervention has derailed the process.
The City has worked closely, rigorously and in good faith
with Fosters and the CSPC for more than a year to arrive at satisfactory
planning and development codes.
Last December, the CSPC signed off on the agreed density for
the site, between 3.5:1 and 4:1, and also on the indicative levels of services
and amenities to be provided, including public access, heritage values to be
preserved, design excellence, parkland and sustainability measures.
That set in train completion of a VPA between the City and
Foster’s as the owner of the site.
After more than two years of rigorous analysis at all
levels, a balance between community needs and appropriate density on this site
had been reached. The density levels were based on achieving a benchmark of
design excellence across the site.
All the analysis, including that from Foster’s, shows that 4:1 is at the extreme upper end of an
acceptable and achievable floor space ratio for the site, balancing the owner’s opportunity for additional density with
environmental constraints.
The Government wants more and bigger tower apartment blocks,
claiming that there is further latitude in the FSR controls.
CLOVER’S eNEWS – Friday 2 June 2006 – No. 299
The Following additional information was supplied through a Media Statement:
Media
release from Town Hall – Saturday 3rd June
2006
Community benefits threatened by State Government action
on CUB site
An eleventh
hour grab for cash by the State Government is jeopardising two years of careful
planning to set development controls and achieve community benefit from
redevelopment of the historic CUB site on Broadway, the Lord Mayor Clover Moore
MP said today.
“On the eve
of the City reaching a landmark agreement with Foster’s to go-ahead with this
very important urban site, the Government has made a power play that will
compromise the community returns to residents,” Ms Moore
said.
“The
Minister for Planning has set the City up to fail on CUB to justify the
Government getting their hands on the cash. The Government wants to rip more
than $30 million in levies out of the project and could take as much as $100
million – a move that has come at the last minute with no formal prior notice,
and with the unpalatable result that the density of the high-rise buildings on
the site will significantly increase.
“Just this
week Fosters confirmed with my office it was ready for a public announcement.
The Government’s shameful late intervention has derailed the process, stopped
the City and Fosters signing the agreement, jeopardising heritage and park
proposals for the site.”
Ms Moore
said the City had worked closely, rigorously and in good faith with Foster’s and
the Government-controlled Central Sydney Planning Committee (CSPC) for more than
a year to arrive at satisfactory planning and development
codes.
“The CSPC
signed off on the agreed range of densities for the site of 3.5:1 – 4.0:1 last
December, and also on the indicative levels of services and amenities to be
provided, including public access, heritage values to be preserved, design
excellence, parkland and sustainability measures,” Ms Moore
said.
“That
agreement set in train completion of a voluntary planning agreement (VPA)
between the City and Foster’s as the owner of the
site.
“After more
than two years of rigorous analysis at all levels a balance between community
needs and aspirations and appropriate density on this important site had been
reached.
“The
density levels were based on achieving a benchmark of design excellence across
the site.
“All the
analysis, including that from Foster’s, shows that 4:1 is at the extreme upper
end of an acceptable and achievable floor space ratio for the site – balancing
the owner’s opportunity for additional density with environmental
constraints.
“The
Government wants more and bigger tower apartment blocks. The proposed 5,000
square metre public park and $3 million community centre which the City fought
long and hard for will be jeopardised.
“This looks
like the Cross City Tunnel all over again – the Government seeking upfront fees
in exchange for controls that benefit the developer but are contrary to the
public interest,” Ms Moore said.
FACT SHEET
- The CUB site is 5.7
hectares – roughly equal to four City blocks, or twice the size of World Square
Tower footprint.
Population – 3,000 people. 250,000 square metres of floor space. 1,800
dwellings. Estimated value of development is between $800 million and $1
billion. - In addition to the public benefit
of a new 5,000 square metre park, the draft controls and planning agreement
provide for: a new 1,000 square metres community facility; a Child Care centre;
Public art; completion of internal roads to City standards and a series of
necessary intersection upgrades; external perimeter footpath and road upgrades,
with additional cycle and pedestrian facilities; and a series of direct links
to regional and district parks, including Victoria Park to the west and Prince
Alfred Park to the east. - The draft controls also
provide for important heritage buildings to be protected, with a new ‘Brewery
Square’
created to showcase the historical character of the old Kent Brewery. - Site was a brewery from
1835. Operations ceased in early 2005. - The process which is being
followed by the City is as required by the Minister. - Negotiations on the
Voluntary Planning Agreement have been comprehensive and protracted because it
is such a major landmark site. - (Minister’s own) State representatives from CSPC have been
actively involved in and endorsed this process. - The negotiations with
Fosters are in the final stages, with both sides working closely and
productively together. - The Redfern Waterloo
Authority (RWA) affordable housing levy has never been part of this negotiation;
that’s a matter for the State
Government to determine. - The City has relied on
advice from the RWA (officer discussions) and wrote to the Minister’s own Department last July – and after 10 months
the City still hasn’t had a reply. - Verbal advice was that the
State Government would negotiate this separately, with expectations around 3
per cent. It now appears that the minister is considering a much higher levy,
which compromises the workability of the VPA negotiated with the City and CSPC. - The City set out to achieve
a win-win for the City community and for the site’s
owner. It preserves heritage buildings, provides community benefits and
promotes design excellence. - There’s
been much consideration given to the densities and height configuration which
can be accommodated on this site, with various options carefully evaluated. - The Minister has a view,
not based on planning studies, that density should be arbitrarily increased and
wants to override the advice of planning staff, and the decision of the Council
and the CSPC. - It doesn’t send a good signal to those wanting to invest in Australia’s only global city when the Minister steps in and
overturns planning decisions without proper information or any legitimate
basis. - The Minister’s action here highlights why it was wrong for the
State Government to introduce recent changes to planning laws. - Draft planning controls
endorsed by CSPC and Council December 2005, with close consultation with all
CSPC members. - Outcome resulted from a
thorough and logical process of analysis: - Design competition, with
respected Judges including Graham Jahn (Chair), Richard Johnson and Professor
James Werrick. At that time the FSR contemplated an FSR of 4.4 to
1. This was found by the Jury to be too high for any development and
especially for a predominantly residential one. - A Conservation Management
Plan, signed off by the Heritage office. - Other studies including
economic analysis, traffic, open space and community facilities. - Public engagement through
forums and discussions. - The City has spent in the
order of $500,000 on studies, design review and costs associated with the VPA. - The winning team (Cox and
Tzannes, Peter John Cantrell driving) then developed the winning concept design
in greater detail, considering traffic, heritage protection etc. - The main limiting factor on
an achievable FSR is requirements for reasonable amenity under Section 65 and
acceptable building form. - The City engaged Bligh
Vother Neild (Lawrence Neild) to
independently analyse the design evolution. He came to the conclusion the
maximum FSR for the site should be 3.5:1, in order not to compromise its
heritage setting and provide reasonable amenity. - This was further rigorously
tested, due to the need to maximise the site’s
potential, between the City and the owner which showed that 4.1 may be
achievable but is at the extreme upper end of an acceptable FSR for the
site. The logic behind a 3.5:1-4:1 FSR range was to ensure that the
achievement of 4:1 was contingent on achieving design excellence. - The basic premise of the
controls is to allow more than doubling the height limit from 45 metres to 100
metres towards Broadway, and the provision of a park to the rear of the site,
close to the adjoining community. It will get good sun access. The
controls also allow other buildings over 45m high. - The planning controls
contain very detailed controls regarding solar access to the park, design
excellence, street grid pattern, heritage, sustainability etc. - The doubling of the height
limit will return the developer views in an area of the site that can
accommodate it, while the park (5,000 square metres – 10% of site area) will
provide amenity to the future residents and adjoining Chippendale. - Design excellence is
provided for and will be achieved by requiring a Stage 1 DA (which is after a
full competition) for the whole site and then a competitive process for
buildings at “Stage 2”. This is the same for all other
buildings in the City. - The City is allowing the
winning architect of the design competition to design the first building at
Stage 2. - All the analysis, including
from the applicant shows that 4.1 is at the extreme upper end of an acceptable
and achievable FSR for the site, balancing it’s
opportunity for additional density with environmental constraints. - The process has been
extensive, detailed, thorough and responsible, under close oversight by the
CSPC - The only thing that may
compromise design excellence is an excessive FSR. 4:1 is at the extreme
upper end. Anything over 4:1 would be a terrible outcome