Urgent Urgent Urgent Urgent

Please write to the Minister or your local Member of Parliament requesting that a commission of inquiry be held before the Minister grants development consent to development for the walling of Newcastle Harbour in a way that is against the spirit and letter of the Hunter Regonal Environmental Plan  amendment No.3.

There are two letters below;

1. is the request to the Minister
2. the submission to the DA (Also contains a request for Commission of
Inquiry.

Thanks
Best wishes
Doug.


Monday, 28 August 2000
The Hon Dr. Andrew Refshauge MP
Deputy Premier, Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Minister for Housing.
Level 31 Governor Macquarie Tower
1 Farrer Place SYDNEY 2000

Dear Minister Refshauge ,

Central Honeysuckle Request for Commission of Inquiry D.A. 211-06-2000

You are the Consent Authority for the Development Application 211-06-2000 which affects Merewether Street Wharf Newcastle and the Hunter Regional Environmental Plan 1989 Amendment No. 3 Central Honeysuckle. This REP was especially gazetted by the Hon Craig Knowles on the 10 December 1997 to 'contribute to the Government's objectives for the Hunter'. You also are the Minister in charge of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation which is the real estate/developer in this instant.

The development application 211-06-2000 is in conflict with the letter and spirit of the Hunter REP No3 and we therefore ask you establish a commission of inquiry to advise you on the merits of the development application before consent is granted.

The former Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning Hon Craig Knowles in 1997 announced that he would request the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry to consider the Development Application for the Merewether Street Wharf hotel before giving his determination.

In making his announcement Mr Knowles stated that "the Honeysuckle Development is a major urban renewal project which has benefited from significant ($100 million) State and Commonwealth funds over the last few years" and that "Newcastle City Council had been indecisive over the rezoning of the Honeysuckle land..."

To achieve the Government's vision for the regionally significant Central Honeysuckle area it is essential that the spirit and detail of the Regional Environmental Plan (Amendment No.3) be complied with.

We believe that the most appropriate way to achieve the Government's vision and resolve the conflict which is apparent between the Council DCP, the REP No3, the Urban Design Plan Civic Area 1995 and the Development Application is by an independent Commission of Inquiry advising you the Minister and Consent Authority.

We trust that this matter will receive your urgent attention and that a date for the Commission of Inquiry will be set in the near future.

Yours sincerely,
Doug Lithgow 
enclosed submission re development

Friday, 11 August 2000
Mr D. Sneddon
Regional Director
Hunter and Central Coast Regions
Department of Urban Affairs and Planning
Level 4  251 Wharf Road
NEWCASTLE 2300

Dear Mr. Sneddon,

Objection Development Application No.211-06-2000 for various Lots including Merewether Street Wharf Newcastle.

Please register Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc. as an objector to the Development Application No.211-06-2000 as exhibited.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement has a long standing interest in the development of the Newcastle foreshore since 1952 with the first exhibition of the Northumberland County Planning Scheme. We have watched the development of planning over the years and the Movement has been the community voice supporting the planning process and a public advocate in support of the public domain.

The Movement was disappointed that the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning did not accept the Movement's request for public participation during the preparation of the REP No.3.

Notwithstanding the Department's failure to allow participation we staunchly support the Regional Environmental Plan amendment No.3 as prescribed and believe that the letter and spirit of the plan should be complied with by the Honeysuckle Development Corporation who is the real estate agent or land owner/developer in this instant.

Our view is that the planning conflicts that have been revealed in the current development application should be resolved by the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning establishing a Commission of Inquiry as was promised by his colleague the Hon Craig Knowles when he held the planning portfolio.(See letter from the Ministers office MRL 68579)

A Commission of Inquiry would allow the development to be considered on its merits in an impartial public forum and lead to a positive outcome.

The other avenue open to the community to uphold the provisions of the REP amendment No.3 if the current development is consented to without modification is for a third party to begin proceedings in the Land and Environment Court. If this was successful the consent would be set aside and perhaps a new REP would be made.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc. reserves the right to take action in this regard.

Our objections to the Development Application as exhibited are as follows:

The developments proposed at Merewether Street Wharf and on Wharf Rd at Newcastle must be assessed in terms of the provisions of the Regional Environment Plan-amendment No.3 which was made by the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning on the 10/12/1997.

The Minister in making the Hunter Regional Environmental Plan Amendment No.3 has acknowledged the regional environmental planning significance of the central Honeysuckle area.

The development as proposed should in the first instance be rejected because it does not comply with:

A) the Objectives of the REP 1989 Amendment No.3 and
B) the REP 1989 Amendment No.3 Central Honeysuckle-Public Domain Concept Plan and
C) the Urban Design Plan Newcastle Civic Area.

A) Clause 12 Objectives not complied with:

Objective 1(a) 'development which by design use or character specifically takes advantage of both its waterfront and inner city location and avoids a continuous built edge along the waterfront'. The development by not taking advantage of the Public Domain Strategy with its open public square opposite Argyle Street and former AA Coy. Offices creates the appearance of a continuous built edge. Furthermore the presentation of private openspace along the residential development could perhaps be better distributed equally at the Wharf Rd frontage to give relief to the bare rear of the buildings.

The buildings at this regionally significant location should be designed to be seen in the round and present a more articulated frontage to the harbour and to the south.

Objective 1(b) 'provide for development which will complement the activities of the Port of Newcastle'.  By not creating the public square required by the Public Domain the development closes off the option of opening up the city to the Harbour and allowing for port related moorings to be created at Merewether St Wharf. The development as exhibited presents a barrier between the city and its waterfront.

Objective 1(c ) 'to provide for development which allows for visual links and public access between the waterfront and the inner city.'  The proposed development doesn't make an effort to realise the potential and directions embodied within REP No.3 to achieve the visual and public access links required and will unfortunately make the properties on the southern side of Wharf Rd difficult to be developed properties behind the barrier of this development.

Objective 1(d) 'mix of land uses that enhances the Newcastle waterfront and contributes to the role of the Newcastle CBD as a regional capital'.  The development as proposed is totally isolated from the CBD and will probably provide more residential apartments for retirees without the public activity areas of the hotel perhaps ever being built. There is no guarantee that the hotel will be built in the foreseeable future.

The development will not be able to bring life to the mausoleum type presentation of the historically significant railway workshop buildings at Honeysuckle. These buildings need an honest presentation that reflects their original railway use with a new vibrant activity. It is unfortunate that a hotel complex such as is proposed could not  be integrated with the railway workshop buildings to create a new synergy.

Objective 1(e) (f) (g) and (h) quantitative evidence is also needed that these objectives are properly satisfied.

B) REP 1989 Amendment No.3 Central Honeysuckle-Public Domain Concept Plan.

REP 1989 Amendment No.3 Central Honeysuckle - Public Domain Concept Plan has statutory recognition as an integral part of the REP No.3. It was made by the Minister for Urban Affairs and Planning and reflects the view of executive government for the development of the Honeysuckle lands. Newcastle City Council's DCP 40 has no statutory status and is not the principal document to be used in assessing the current development.

The design concepts and detail of the Minister's REP and the Urban Design Plan Newcastle Civic Area should be given preference over the Newcastle Council Plans where there is conflict .

Furthermore the Honeysuckle area's Regional Significance (See Aim of REP No3 and Part 10  Development of certain land of regional significance) places added weight on the importance of the implementation of the spirit and detail of the REP No.3.

The REP No3 Public Domain Concept Plan is further refined in the Urban Design Plan Civic Area 1995 (See Schedule 7 Part 2) and REP No3  Clause 16A (2) "Before granting consent for development to which this clause applies, the consent authority must have regard to the planning principles for the land set out in Schedule 7 and to such documents listed in Part 2 of Schedule as are relevant to the proposed development".

The Minister who is the determining authority must have regard to the Urban Design Plan Civic Area (1995) which is the relevant document for the Merewether Street Wharf area.

If the Minister accepts developments which are in clear breach of the Public Domain Concept Plan throughout the Central Honeysuckle area the whole waterfront at Newcastle could be walled off from the city and from the people of Newcastle. It will be possible to drive through Honeysuckle Central without knowing that the harbour exists.

The REP together with its planning principles provides adequate detail to ensure good quality development at Honeysuckle provided the that plans are complied with. The current DA has to be modified to comply with the plan.

The enclosed illustration of the Merewether Street corridor from the Urban Design Plan 1995 demonstrates clearly the importance of ensuring that the development is modified to comply with the REP Public Domain Concept Plan and the Urban Design Plan

The DA did not correctly describe the area of Wharf Rd land which is required to complete the development. Part of Wharf Rd Lot 1 DP1015073 was compulsorily acquired by the Honeysuckle Development Corporation with the approval of his Excellency the Governor of NSW and notified in the Government. Gazette 21/7/2000. We do not understand why the proponent did not accurately describe the land unless it is to confuse the general public on the effect of the proposal on Wharf Rd.

Wharf Road, Merewether Street and Workshop lane are adversely impacted by the Development Application which is currently on display.  These carriageways provide the only road route servicing the Newcastle Foreshore and because of the bottleneck and the contorted alignment and location of Workshop Lane they are sometimes clogged and grid locked.

This problem exists at this stage even though there is virtually no traffic generating development in the Central Honeysuckle area. However with the current development in place and the full development of the central honeysuckle area, traffic conditions will be totally unworkable. The opening to the underground parking area should not be permitted off Workshop Lane.

The Workshop Lane intersections constitute a real safety hazard not only to pedestrian movement in the area but to the provision of a safe secure route for emergency vehicles that may need to traverse the complex. There is no room for vehicles to overtake when the lane is clogged and there is the threat that pedestrians could be crushed against the bollards that line both sides of the Lane.

Existing users of the area will be severely affected by the removal of angle parking from both sides of Wharf Rd and by the multiple egress and entrance points for vehicles along the length of the development.
   
Furthermore the buildings and their rear-end facades will create a poor quality streetscape along the southern frontage to Wharf Road. This has been exacerbated by the shifting of the Merewether Street Wharf development further to the south to obtain firm footings for the larger buildings now proposed.

The Urban Design Plan for the Newcastle Civic Area identified the eastern building for public use such as an aquarium and states that only one vehicular crossing and entry point should be provided for each block. There was to be no access to buildings off Workshop Lane.

We object to the Newcastle waterfront being given over to private residential use without active public frontages at ground level.  The failure of the Honeysuckle Corporation to implement a Foreshore Reserve and landscape plan including the construction and renovation of wharves and sea walls whilst there was Better Cities money available was the Corporation's most harmful act. There is an urgent need to obtain an agreement between the State Government and Honeysuckle Corporation to seek a solution or Honeysuckle will never achieve its potential for creating a better city.

Perhaps a more appropriate development for the Merewether Wharf area would be to construct lighter buildings of two or three storeys and situate them closer to the foreshore with a more generous aspect to the south.

The proposal of the proponent to excavate an entrance to an underground car parking area off Workshop Lane as mentioned is not satisfactory and would clutter this important pedestrian access and physically open corridor. The down ramp will be obtrusive and an ugly void. It is also too close to the Permanent Way Store heritage building and such an access ramp is not supported by the Urban Design Plan.

Workshop Lane is a narrow two lane roadway and the entrance would be too close to the intersection which suffers grid lock conditions when Merewether Street traffic is stationary waiting for the railway gates or when the Hunter Street lights are red.

All parking for this development would be best placed off site and the total development be motor vehicle free. Planning for Honeysuckle was predicated on the concept of a pedestrian precinct with the motor vehicle subservient and public transport the major people mover. Certainly there must be greater effort applied to encouraging people to visit and commute to Newcastle by using train services. But the reality of a more balanced transport approach must be embodied in our planning. 

Underground car parking should not be countenanced because of the wharf construction, the high watertable and possibility of mining subsidence.  Off site car parking must be provided for the longer term and overnight parking.

Part of Merewether Street Wharf should also be available for mooring cruise ships and passenger ferries like the Manly ferry which often visit the port. (See photos attached)

The Merewether Street Wharf and Flinders Cove area of Newcastle need to have active frontages to the port. Private front yards to the harbour are the antithesis of Newcastle's social heritage and the life of the working port.

Flinders Cove was promised as the NSW Government's gift to Newcastle to celebrate the Bicentenary of Lieu. John Shortland's discovery of the Hunter River and of Coal in September 1797. The Cove has not been constructed even though a DA and EIS have been exhibited. It is the Parks and Playgrounds Movement's view that the Government should create a shortened Cove with Wharf Road reconnected and that a firm decision must be made at State Cabinet level and included in a statutory plan.

If the State Government has decided not to honour its promise to construct the Flinders Cove as shown in the Urban Design Plan it should direct the Honeysuckle Corporation to reconnect the Wharf Road with the western divided carriage way road as shown in Fig 1.2.1 Page 2 Urban Design Plan. The reopening of Wharf Rd with a round-about at the intersection of Merewether Street would solve the traffic bottleneck and provide an appropriate emergency vehicle route and a better and more pedestrian safe alignment of the roadway.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement is resolute that the development must be modified to more closely comply with the REP Public Domain Concept Plan and the Urban Design Plan as required by the provisions of the statutory plan.

The Movement would be pleased to lead evidence on these matters to a commission of inquiry if required.

Yours sincerely,

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

Please find the attached documents
NSW Government Gazette No 146 12 December 1997
Section of REP 1989 Amendment No3 Central Honeysuckle -Public Domain
Concept Plan with development charted .(2 sheets).
Excerpts from Urban Design Plan .
Photograph of Merewether Street Wharf and Illustration showing Merewether St corridor.
Letter from the office of Minister Knowles