UPDATED: A battle is brewing between state government urban transformation agency UrbanGrowth NSW and the City of Sydney over projected densities in part of the Central to Eveleigh redevelopment.
A 19-hectare site in Waterloo is at the centre of the controversy following a report by City of Sydney chief executive Monica Barone tabled at a council meeting on Monday night, based on publicly available information.
The report said UrbanGrowth was proposing residential densities of over 700 people per hectare (or 70,000 per square kilometre) on the site, which was “unprecedented” in Australia and rare internationally.
“UrbanGrowth suggest they will provide 7000 new dwellings, including replacing the 2000 social housing dwellings with community facilities and some retail and work space on the 19-hectare estate. Based on these simple numbers, the proposed average residential density is over 700 people per hectare (70,000 people per square kilometre),” it said.
The city is concerned that this level of density would adversely impact amenity, and lead to insufficient open space, building overshadowing, removal of tree canopy and the inability to meet minimum apartment design standards.
A City of Sydney spokesman told The Fifth Estate density was not something the city shied away from – pointing to Green Square – however the plans as they stood went far beyond “density done well”.
“The existing public domain, including parks and streets, will be intensely impacted and the new development will require significant investment to support amenity and recreation including the provision of large new, areas of open space and high quality community infrastructure,” the report said.
“We are concerned that development at this intensity will mean that developers won’t be able to meet current standards in the NSW Government’s own Apartment Design Guide, which includes important amenity provisions for sunlight and natural cross-ventilation.”
UrbanGrowth deny projections
A spokesman for UrbanGrowth told The Fifth Estate it was unaware of where the City of Sydney figures came from and it was too early to provide final land use breakdowns of the precinct densities.
In a letter to the editor of the Sydney Morning Herald, in response to the paper’s story on Monday’s council meeting, UrbanGrowth chief executive David Pitchford said the council’s figures did not “reconcile with the design envelope and density levels we are proposing”.
“We have identified the potential for around 26,000 additional people across precincts of government-owned land in the whole Central, Redfern Station, Eveleigh and Waterloo area over the next 15-20 years. Any suggestion that we are not also considering future amenity in our work would be misrepresentative,” he said.
“The work to date on the Waterloo Estate renewal indicates that overall density would be similar to Green Square town centre, with the benefit of a ‘next generation’ Metro rail station, open space and community facilities to support it.”
Devil is in the detail
Graham Jahn, City of Sydney’s director of city planning, development & transport, told The Fifth Estate UrbanGrowth had been muddying the waters by using a different measure of density to make the area seem less dense.
UrbanGrowth, he said, was reporting “active density” figures, which included people who would be in the area during the day, including those associated with commercial and retail uses, and dividing the number by the total floor space.
This was a figure generally used by transport planners and was not the figure that should be used to judge residential density, which was the issue at hand concerning council, he said.
He said the documents produced by UrbanGrowth “never used the word ‘residential’ and the fine print says numbers stated include jobs”.
“What they are doing is not dealing with the issues we’ve raised.” It was “comparing apples with oranges”.
“There is very little hard information out there but what they have announced is that there will be 7000 dwellings on 19 hectares on the Waterloo Estate.
“So you easily calculate 368 dwellings per ha.”
Assuming around two people per dwelling, that equated to about 700 people per ha, he said.
“We have no idea how many retail jobs are on that site or office jobs because that’s not announced. We raised a concern purely around the residential numbers they announced on the Waterloo Estate.”
Mr Jahn said UrbanGrowth had chosen to compare the Waterloo precinct to Green Square which was 278 ha for the larger urban renewal area with a Town Square of 17 ha. The residential dwelling density over the Town Centre area is 4000 dwellings, or 235 dwellings per ha.
To go from Green Square’s 235 dwellings per ha to 368 per ha at Waterloo was a “quantum leap”, he said.
Why it’s important
Why the issue was important, Mr Jahn said, was because of the minimum standards of amenity considered important, such as privacy, separation of buildings, solar access, cross ventilation and footprint.
On commercial and retail building there was no market failure that required those minimum standards.
“Why we are concerned is that it’s being oversold in expectations created in government that they can achieve the normal quality outcomes that are expected in all residential development in the state with these densities”.
On the need to create density around transport nodes, Mr Jahn said, “not at any price”.
“You want parks to have at least 50 per cent solar access in winter – the sort of standards that have created the upper limit.
A spokesman from UrbanGrowth responded to Mr Jahn’s comments by saying it was “too early to have an exact number as this will be refined over 18 months of detailed masterplanning informed by expert studies and community and stakeholder consultation that will involve the City.”
– With Tina Perinotto
Below is an edited text of a memorandum by the chief executive of City of Sydney, Monica Barrone, dated 16 MAY 2016
ITEM 4.3 CENTRAL TO EVELEIGH UPDATE – URBANGROWTH NSW
FILE NO: S124424
MEMORANDUM BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
To Council:
The City has spent the last 10 years developing and implementing Sustainable Sydney
2030 based on significant community and industry stakeholder engagement. It was a
key step in the statutory planning process that resulted in Sydney LEP 2012 and DCP
2012 and the continuing private sector investment that places the City at the forefront
of quality housing supply and delivering new jobs in NSW.
Our planning framework has a clearly articulated community agreed rationale best
demonstrated through urban renewal projects at the Ashmore Estate, Harold Park,
Green Square Town Centre and the ongoing renewal in the CBD.
UrbanGrowth NSW is charged by the NSW Government to be a facilitator of key
development projects across the state and Sydney Metropolitan area where there are
significant market barriers.
UrbanGrowth’s primary objective is to enable the private sector to deliver homes,
workplaces, facilities and community places needed for NSW citizens to enjoy a high
quality of life and to concentrate on areas where market and/or regulatory barriers are
preventing otherwise desirable private sector investment. They are not a statutory
planning authority, a role which currently lies with local councils and the NSW
Department of Planning and Environment.
This report summarises the City’s significant concern about the preparation of the
planning and urban design outcomes of UrbanGrowth’s Central to Eveleigh
Transformation Strategy. We have used publicly available information to set out the
planning and development implications of the NSW Government’s plan to renew
Waterloo in association with a new Metro station.
Of note is the proposed density for the redeveloped social housing estate at Waterloo
that the NSW Government has said will become a mixed development of private,
affordable and social housing.
Using information that UrbanGrowth has publicly released it seems that the proposed
average residential density for the site is over 700 people per hectare (70,000 people
per square kilometre).
Pyrmont, which is currently the densest area in Australia, has, on average, 14,000
people per square kilometre. When it is complete, the larger Green Square area, at
22,000 people per square kilometre, will become the densest area in Australia. There
are smaller pockets such as the ACI site at 36,000 people per square kilometre.
UrbanGrowth are proposing over 70,000 people per square kilometre for Waterloo.
Development at this density over this 19 hectare area is unprecedented in Australia
and rare internationally. The existing public domain, including parks and streets, will
be intensely impacted and the new development will require significant investment to
support amenity and recreation including the provision of large new, areas of open
space and high quality community infrastructure.
We are concerned that development at this intensity will mean that developers won’t
be able to meet current standards in the NSW Government’s own Apartment Design
Guide, which includes important amenity provisions for sunlight and natural crossventilation.
The City also understands that UrbanGrowth is planning to rezone a large part of the
surrounding area – beyond the scope of the proposed Central to Eveleigh
redevelopment and beyond the scope of their authority.
A map published by UrbanGrowth shows a study area boundary that includes a
number of conservation areas including parts of Redfern, Surry Hills, Chippendale and
Alexandria. Currently, the strategic planning authority for the majority of this land is the
City of Sydney Council excluding any State Significant Development sites already in
place.
Intensifying residential development across this area could risk the market growth of
high value businesses and sectors important to the future of Sydney’s economy.
Despite the fact that these significant changes have not been put to the public, detailed
planning and design continues to forge ahead. We are concerned that basic principles
will be agreed by the NSW Cabinet before the City or the community has had a chance
to fully understand their impacts.
It is important to emphasise that despite the Memorandum of Understanding between
the City and UrbanGrowth there have been significant issues around how much
information UrbanGrowth has shared with the City in the following three key areas:
- the scope and purpose of the Central to Eveleigh Urban Transformation Strategy, referred to as the Central to Eveleigh Strategy;
- the reference design of the renewal of the government-owned Waterloo Estate and the adjacent recently acquired Waterloo Metro station site; and
- the degree to which the future Waterloo Metro Station should be funded by the rezoning and the potential increased development that may result in a catchment area yet to be disclosed around the Waterloo station catchment.
The potential scope and scale of the Central to Eveleigh precinct redevelopment poses
significant concern for the City of Sydney in terms of the level of physical and social
infrastructure and services that will be required to support such a concentrated
increase of the resident and worker population.
1. Scope and Purpose of Central to Eveleigh Urban Transformation Strategy.
The map in Figure 1 produced and published by UrbanGrowth defines a Study Area
covering 560 hectares within the Sydney LGA. It clearly identifies the precincts of
government-owned land which will be the focus of the forthcoming Urban
Transformation Strategy.
What is not clear is how many, if any, other yet to be identified government-owned
sites within the study area are being considered for renewal and how much privatelyowned
land currently within the Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2012 may be
identified for rezoning to increase the scale and density of development.
(Note. The map in Figure 1 can be found in the Business Paper for the meeting of Council on
16 May 2016 – Item 4.3.)
The study area boundary (shown above) is Crown Street, Surry Hills to Goulburn
Street, along Goulburn Street through the southern part of the CBD to Harris Street
and Wentworth Park, and takes in all of Ultimo, Chippendale, Darlington to Newtown
and then to Ashmore street in Erskineville, through to McEvoy Street and along Phillip
Street and back to Crown Street. It includes a number of conservation areas including
but not limited to parts of Redfern, Surry Hills, Chippendale and Alexandria.
One of the issues arising, is the message this boundary signals to developers and land
owners, let alone the residents and broader community that live and work within the
boundary.
Figure 2 (below and enlarged for clarity on the following page) suggests the strategic
planning outcome UrbanGrowth are seeking even though they are not a strategic
planning authority. Currently, the strategic planning authority for the majority of this
land is the City of Sydney Council excluding the State Significant Development sites
already in place.
This image has been shown in UrbanGrowth public presentations and on their website
to notionally indicate the extent of density and potential height and scale of future
development that could be expected in the study area on both public and private land
outside of the key government-owned precincts identified in Figure 1. The illustration
usefully indicates UrbanGrowth’s thinking, showing new development of up to 8
storeys in the blue coloured blocks, 9-17 storeys in the yellow coloured blocks and 18-
32 storeys in the orange coloured blocks.
UrbanGrowth are proposing to progress to the urban transformation strategy delivery
framework stage (previously known as a master plan) in 2016. Within the study area
along an increase in residents from 52,000 (existing) to a range from 81,000 to
108,000, and an increase in workers from 78,000 (existing) to range from 92,000 to
103,000 with seven new neighbourhoods is anticipated.
(Note. The map in Figure 2 can be found in the Business Paper for the meeting of Council on
16 May 2016 – Item 4.3.)
(Note. The map in Figure 2 enlarged can be found in the Business Paper for the meeting of
Council on 16 May 2016 – Item 4.3.)
There appears to include possible significant redevelopment along the Botany Road
corridor, along Redfern Street towards Redfern Park, Regent Street, through
Chippendale, over the railway tracks between Redfern and Central stations, and up
towards the CBD including the Goulburn Street Parking Station and the Centennial
Plaza site. Of course, there may be additional development considered beyond the
coloured areas shown.
The public release of these illustrations has resulted in the City being approached by
a landowner seeking rezoning to double their height and floor space purely on the basis
of their land relationship to the investigation area boundary. This is prior to formal
investigative work being done to determine to what extent rezoning could or should
occur within the area and before any contributions framework is in place – an essential
driver for the study.
Advised by City staff of this, UrbanGrowth added a notice on their website noting that
illustrations “do not constitute current or future rezoning proposals and should not be
interpreted as such unless specifically noted”. However, it this is unlikely to tame
speculative rezoning requests coming in as experienced in other areas.
Our recent Economic, Cultural and Start Up strategies and action plans highlight the
City’s understanding of the importance of emerging industry clusters in the Central to
Eveleigh Precinct. There must be integrated strategic objectives underpinning the
identification of any sites that may seem capable of increased residential development
or other uses. The area in question has experienced significant metropolitan scale jobs
growth in high value industries in a low development scenario which could be displaced
in a high residential yield scenario, with the risk of weakening productive output that
the market is driving and is important for Sydney’s future.
2. Waterloo Estate
UrbanGrowth is the developer of the Waterloo Estate. It would appear that the NSW
government-owned estate is priority development influenced by the new Metro railway
station. UrbanGrowth suggest they will provide 7,000 new dwellings, including
replacing the 2,000 social housing dwellings, with community facilities and some retail
and work space on the 19 ha estate. Based on these simple numbers, the proposed
average residential density is over 700 people per hectare (70,000 people per square
kilometre).
It is worth comparing that to Pyrmont, which is currently the densest area in Australia
with 14,000 people per square kilometre. When it is complete Green Square, at 22,000
people per square kilometre will become the densest area in Australia. What
UrbanGrowth are proposing is 70,000 people per square kilometre.
In the international context, this density over a similar sized area is rare. London has
no areas of the size of Waterloo at this density. New York and Paris have only a few.
Neighbourhoods of this density are found in parts of Hong Kong, but not in Singapore.
Given available public information we expect to see as many as ten or more buildings
over 30 stories on the Waterloo Estate with others up to 20 storeys. Development at
this intensity (more than 5 times the average density of Pyrmont Ultimo) on the
Waterloo Estate could set expectations beyond ‘density done well’ and beyond the
capacity of future developers to meet the objectives of the NSW Government’s own
Apartment Design Guide.
The underlying approach is a housing mix of 70:30 meaning 70% private housing and
affordable housing and 30% social housing, as outlined in the NSW Government’s
Community Plus program. This supportable approach however, does not have to be
contained within the confined area of the existing estate in order to improve urban
amenity.
The City is primarily concerned of possible outcomes such as:
(a) insufficient open space and streets suitable for a very high intensity of use;
(b) apartments unable to meet the amenity standards, including sunlight and natural
cross-ventilation as outlined in the Apartment Design Guide and which other
developers must abide by;
(c) likely winter overshadowing to existing residents and open spaces in surrounding
neighbourhoods; and
(d) extensive removal of existing mature tree canopy throughout the Waterloo Estate
due to excessive building footprints.
3. Waterloo Metro Rail Station
Catchment land which benefits from the new Waterloo Station is proposed to be
investigated for increased development to make a financial contribution to partly fund
the rail station (in addition to local contributions). We understand that the boundary for
a more discrete area around the future Waterloo station is currently under investigation
as a State Infrastructure Contribution (SIC) area.
Any investigation area should exclude heritage items and conservation areas. In
addition any development around heritage items and conservation areas should
provide an appropriate transition similar to the City’s approach in the Ashmore and
Rosebery precincts.
Traffic and congestion
The area experiences considerable traffic congestion and to date the City has not been
given access to any of Transport for NSW’s traffic modelling. It is also clear that key
intersections and transport interchange are performing poorly and that before any
additional urban renewal areas are added to those already identified and underway,
traffic modelling is made public and funded solutions are identified and provided for.
Other key infrastructure provisions should also include:
- the upgrade of Redfern Railway station to meet accessibility standards, provide a new pedestrian crossing of the rail corridor and address pedestrian and cycling access and end of trip facilities;
- open space, in particular land area large enough to support active open space;
- streets, plazas, and other public areas;
- supporting community facilities and social infrastructure; and
- sustainability initiatives, such as improved energy and water efficiency andurban ecology.
The City has produced extensive infrastructure plans to support the delivery of high
density urban renewal in the Ashmore and Green Square areas in consultation with
community and industry stakeholders. Through these processes the City has
developed a thorough understanding of planning, funding and supporting delivery of
state and local infrastructure that is key to successful and liveable urban renewal
precincts. We recommend the City leads the appropriate studies and provision of
infrastructure in consultation with other agencies and the Department.
4. Waterloo Station Precinct Investigation
In relation to points 2 and 3, the Department of Planning and Environment have
proposed that the City work with NSW Government agencies on a ‘Waterloo Station
Precinct Investigation’ process, and have suggested that Terms of Reference be
discussed in the near future to cover the Waterloo Estate, Redfern Estate and Botany
Road block; and private landholdings leading to a rezoning process by the Department
as a State Significant Precinct. The Guidelines for this new kind of State Significant
development category were recently released by the Department.
The draft proposal is for the government-owned lands including the Waterloo and
Redfern public housing estates and the Waterloo Station block on Botany Road be
identified as State Significant Precincts with planning led by UrbanGrowth, supported
by the City and assessed by the Department of Planning. The privately-owned lands
would be investigated as a Priority Precinct led by the Department of Planning,
supported by the City and by UrbanGrowth, with final determination on rezoning
proposals made by the Minister. Typically, State Significant Development switches off
the City’s planning controls and heritage referrals.
North and South Eveleigh
In November 2015, UrbanGrowth put forward a revised proposal for the North Eveleigh
site that increased the Gross Floor Area (GFA) from 51,000sqm to 62,568 to allow for
more apartments (from between 700-750 to approximately 800 units), increasing the
building heights from 8 to 12-storeys to 16-20 storeys; to maintaining the heritage listed
Clothing Store for retail and community uses and allowing a maximum of 531 parking
spaces.
The City’s submission to the North Eveleigh preliminary consultation recommended
that development comply with the NSW Government’s Apartment Design Guide (ADG)
and the City of Sydney DCP2012; that the City should be the consent authority for
future development; that 12% of all dwellings at North Eveleigh are affordable housing
consistent with the 2008 Concept Plan approval; that parking rates be reviewed to
deliver the sustainability outcomes identified in UrbanGrowth’s own strategy report;
and UrbanGrowth should work closely with the City to deliver parks, streets and
community spaces that can be maintained within the City’s existing networks
There has been limited information regarding the South Eveleigh area, however we
understand that the scale of development will likely be up to 18-20 storeys, providing
“a diverse range of apartment buildings is possible with taller residential buildings
adjacent to the rail corridor and lower buildings on the precinct edges to provide a
transition to the existing neighbourhood”.
Conclusion
The current role of UrbanGrowth seems to be both the Government’s strategic
planners, input (and sharing with the Department of Planning in part) setting the
renewal principles and development standards as well as the Government’s developer,
needing to maximise the development and financial opportunities.
This dual role presents serious concerns as to the accountable and transparency as
well as who is protecting the public interest. City of Sydney has remained steadfast in
applying high standards to the redevelopment of all our urban renewal areas and that
adequate social and physical infrastructure is in place to support our new communities.
Despite being assured of a new way of planning and delivering urban renewal by
UrbanGrowth NSW, what is apparent is that the typical ‘growth centre’ approach is also
being applied to renewal of the inner city sites. The problem is that the Central to
Eveleigh Precinct, Bays Precinct and New Parramatta Road areas are not blank
canvases, like the paddocks on the fringes. They contain existing communities, with
existing infrastructure and existing demand on services and the future consequences
of this current governance and planning approaches are of significant concern not only
for the City of Sydney, but also for our existing and future residents, workers and
visitors.
The City is at the forefront of driving housing and jobs growth in NSW (we have the
largest housing growth and jobs growth output in NSW), and we have a strong record
for transparent and rigorous planning and design, delivering density done well on
several key urban renewal precincts.
The City undertakes strategic planning under the guidance of the Central Sydney
Planning Committee, which has both Council and NSW Government representation.
Together, the City and the Central Sydney Planning Committee are best placed to lead
and oversee the strategic planning and plan-making process for private land.
RECOMMENDATION
It is resolved that Council:
(A) note that the Central Sydney Planning Committee and the City are the current
planning authority for much of the investigation land and are best placed to lead
strategic planning for urban renewal on non-government land in the study area
for the Central to Eveleigh Urban Transformation Strategy;
(B) continue its strategic planning role in the Central to Eveleigh study area, with
guidance by the Central Sydney Planning Committee; and
(C) request that the Chief Executive Officer write to the Secretary of the Department
of Planning and Environment:
(a) advising that the City will commence planning studies, consultation and
financial analysis to understand the capacity for urban renewal on the nongovernment
land in the Central to Eveleigh study area, informed by the
following considerations;
(i) the area of land that will benefit from the new station;
(ii) maintaining heritage conservation areas and heritage items;
8
(iii) supporting employment growth in emerging industry clusters;
(iv) improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure;
(v) apartment design that meets the amenity standards of the Apartment
Design Guide and protects residents from the noise and pollution of
busy roads; and
(vi) a scale of development and mix of uses that supports a liveable and
walkable neighbourhood; and
(b) noting that the draft Central to Eveleigh Urban Transformation Strategy or
study area definition should avoid developer speculation and should not
contain recommendations for urban renewal which pre-empt the findings
of the City’s strategic planning work in the study area.
MONICA BARONE
Chief Executive Officer
Moved by the Chair (the Lord Mayor), seconded by Councillor Green –
It is resolved that Council:
(A) note that the Central Sydney Planning Committee and the City are the current
planning authority for much of the investigation land and are best placed to lead
strategic planning for urban renewal on non-government land in the study area
for the Central to Eveleigh Urban Transformation Strategy;
(B) continue its strategic planning role in the Central to Eveleigh study area, with
guidance by the Central Sydney Planning Committee;
(C) request that the Chief Executive Officer write to the Secretary of the Department
of Planning and Environment to express serious concern that:
(i) no area of the city could sustain a density of 70,000 people per square
kilometre, especially Waterloo with its large social housing community;
(ii) it would seem these proposals are being driven by NSW Treasury and the
Finance Ministry to maximise the return to the NSW Government and not
by proper planning processes or concern about the future wellbeing of the
community;
(iii) if these proposals were to go ahead, the NSW Government and
UrbanGrowth will destroy the inner city and condemn people living in the
area to substandard living conditions not seen in most developed cities.
There would be more than 50% of winter overshadowing in parks and
surrounding residential areas and development would not meet the
Government’s own guidelines for apartment design, including standards
for solar access and cross ventilation;
(iv) intensifying residential development to this extent risks displacing the finegrain,
high quality businesses driving the new economy so important to the
State and national economies; and
(v) the proposed massively increased density will result in the loss of all or
most existing trees in the area;
(D) strongly reject these proposals and call on the NSW Planning Minister and
UrbanGrowth to:
(i) go back to the drawing board;
(ii) reduce the extent and stated purpose of the Investigation Area;
(iii) remove Conservation Areas and heritage listed sites from any proposed
Investigation Area;
(iv) outline how they will protect the growth of high value businesses and
sectors in the Investigation Area;
(v) ensure all Conservation Areas have formal transitions in scale immediately
outside the boundary of the Conservation Areas – not within them;
(vi) ensure any rezoning is led by the City of Sydney and driven by “density
done well” principles, the NSW Apartment Design Guide and not by a predetermined
contribution; and
(vii) provide affordable housing, high quality community infrastructure and
adequate open space as required by the NSW Government’s own
guidelines, in the early stages of any new development; and
(E) ask the Chief Executive Officer to prepare and deliver an urgent and effective
communications program to inform people about what is proposed for the Central
to Eveleigh precinct, including the preparation of visuals and videos, flyers,
advertising and public meetings.
Carried unanimously.