Report to General Manager SUBJECT: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan - North … · 2018. 6. 22. · Report of Scott Williamson, Senior Strategic Planner Re: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan

ITEM CiS03 REPORTS 01/05/17

N O R T H S Y D N E Y C O U N C I L R E P O R T S

Report to General Manager Attachments:

1. Summary of submissions received SUBJECT: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan – Interim Submissions report AUTHOR: Scott Williamson, Senior Strategic Planner - Urban Design ENDORSED BY: Joseph Hill, Director City Strategy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In order to deliver much needed public domain and amenity improvements to the North Sydney Centre, Council has been undertaking the Ward Street Precinct Masterplan project. The Masterplan was prompted most significantly by the opportunities presented in the upcoming release of a large Council landholding and reinforced by the delivery of Sydney Metro in 2024. At its meeting of 5 December 2016, Council endorsed the draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan for public exhibition. This report seeks to update Council on the feedback gathered from submissions and recommend a way forward for the project. The draft Masterplan was publicly exhibited between 26 January and 10 March 2017. In response to the exhibition, 30 submissions were received from a variety of interests around the precinct. More than half of these complimented Council on its initiative and supported the significant contribution the project is seeking to make to the public domain. Of the issues raised, most prevalent were that of residential amenity, traffic, economic viability and the criteria for selecting opportunity sites. The consultation process has yielded some valuable feedback that will contribute to the ongoing development of the plan. A key recommendation of this report involves proceeding with a further process of design development and specialist input to the plan. This will involve refinement to respond to feedback and achieve a more informed, comprehensive and realisable vision for the site. Importantly, the key objectives of the draft North District Plan are now known and a crucial part of this refinement will involve strengthening the economic and employment role of North Sydney CBD. The further review of the draft Masterplan will provide opportunities to ensure that the development potential of all sites is better documented; the potential for different amalgamation patterns is explored and the relationship to the North Sydney CBD Capacity and Land Use Strategy is clarified. The refinement will also investigate the possibility of the East Walker Street component of the precinct being detached from the Masterplan, as well as the potential for extension of the North Sydney Centre boundary to the east. In the interim, it is important that individual Planning Proposals initiated by land-owners are strongly discouraged, given this would have the potential to pre-empt or undermine the achievement of a holistic vision for the precinct. Following this design development process, it is recommended that community consultation be again undertaken, following endorsement from Council.

Report of Scott Williamson, Senior Strategic Planner Re: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan – Interim Submissions report

(2)

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Funding for the preparation of the Masterplan is included in the adopted 2015/16 budget. This is further discussed in detail in section 5 of this report Local Government Act 1993: Section 23A Guidelines - Council Decision Making During Merger Proposal Period. The Guidelines have been considered in the preparation of this report and are not applicable as this represents an existing endorsed and funded project identified in the Community Strategic Plan 2013-2023. RECOMMENDATION 1.THAT Council note the issues raised by the community as part of the exhibition of the draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan. 2.THAT Council resolve to take steps toward the finalisation of the draft Masterplan through further specialist input and design development that responds to community, industry and landowner feedback, according to the following:

• The content and strategic direction identified in the draft North District Plan inform the refinement of the Masterplan.

• The scope of opportunity sites be expanded to ensure opportunities are investigated on all sites within the Precinct.

• The scope of design investigation include the potential for a greater variety of site amalgamation options for opportunity sites.

• The relationship of the Ward Street Masterplan and the Capacity and Land Use Study be clarified, with the development potential of all sites within the Masterplan area identified.

• The East Walker Street opportunity site be detached from the Ward Street Precinct Masterplan project and separately pursued by Council staff.

• The boundary of the North Sydney Centre, as defined in NSLEP 2013, be reviewed for potential expansion to the east.

• The actions identified in this report 3.THAT a final draft Masterplan be prepared and reported to Council for the purposes of exhibition.


(3)

LINK TO DELIVERY PROGRAM The relationship with the Delivery Program is as follows: Direction: 1. Our Living Environment Outcome: 1.5 Public open space, recreation facilities and services that meet community

needs Direction:

2. Our Built Environment

Outcome: 2.1 Infrastructure, assets and facilities that meet community needs.

2.2 Improved mix of land use and quality development through design excellence

2.3 Vibrant, connected and well maintained streetscapes and villages that build a sense of community

2.5 Sustainable transport is encouraged 2.6 Improved traffic management

Direction: 3. Our Economic Vitality Outcome: 3.1 Diverse, strong, sustainable and vibrant local economy

3.2 North Sydney CBD as one of Australia’s largest commercial centres Direction: 4. Our Social Vitality Outcome: 4.1 Community is connected

4.2 Community is diverse 4.3 Enhances arts and cultural programs and facilities

4.7 Community is active and healthy 4.8 Enhanced community facilities, information and services

4.9 Enhanced community safety and accessibility Direction: 5. Our Civic Leadership

Outcome: 5.1 Council leads the strategic direction of North Sydney

BACKGROUND The Ward Street Precinct forms the northern end of North Sydney Centre. The precinct supports a mix of privately owned commercial, mixed use and residential development. It also contains the Ward and Harnett Street car parks, which are in Council ownership. The Masterplanning project is intended to allow Council to appropriately plan for a precinct that is undergoing significant and transformational changes, including:


(4)

• Return of a major Council asset: There is a need to plan for the long-term future of the Council-owned Ward and Harnett Street car parks. The Ward Street car park will return to Council control in 2020.

• New transport infrastructure: The proposed Victoria Cross Metro Station will provide faster and more frequent services to the city and major business centres of Sydney’s northwest, Macquarie Park and Barangaroo. The station is to be located just outside the Ward Street precinct and is due to open in 2024.

• Strong private development interest: Private development interest from within the precinct continues to be strong, with a number of possible ‘opportunity sites’ for redevelopment.

• Decommissioned substation: Ausgrid has advised the decommissioned portion of the substation fronting Berry Street is surplus to its needs. The site is likely to be sold following decommission.

• Objectives for the public domain and through-site links: Ongoing development approvals are restricting the opportunity to cohesively address Council’s public domain and pedestrian permeability objectives within the precinct. A Masterplan provides an opportunity to more effectively plan for a meaningful public domain with plaza(s) and linkages.

The combination of these major events in and around the Ward Street Precinct provide a unique catalyst for positive change. The Masterplan will be used to inform any future consideration of the planning controls in the precinct to implement this change. On 5 December 2016, Council resolved to place the draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan on public exhibition. The draft Masterplan was placed on public exhibition between 26 January and 10 March 2017. In response, 30 submissions were received, raising a variety of issues which are discussed further below. 1. Strategic and Policy Context

1.1 A Plan for Growing Sydney The regional strategic plan for Sydney, A Plan for Growing Sydney, was released in December 2014 and identifies North Sydney as part of “Global Sydney”. This plan identifies that there will be 689,000 new jobs created by 2031 in Sydney and that there will need to be an additional 664,000 new dwellings created by that year. Specifically, the Plan identifies as one of its priorities to “investigate potential future employment and housing opportunities associated with a Sydney Rapid Transit (now referred to as Metro) train station at Victoria Cross. It defers more detailed strategic directions to the North District Plan. 1.2 Draft North District Plan The draft North District Plan is intended to provide the level of regional strategic planning that links A Plan for Growing Sydney and local planning at the Council level. When in force, the role of the District Plan will be to influence local planning, primarily through the making and


(5)

amendment of Local Environmental Plans as well as guiding land use, transport and infrastructure planning at the local level. The Plan identifies that the Greater Sydney Commission will work with North Sydney Council to:

• Maximise the land use opportunities provided by the new Metro station • Identify actions to grow jobs into the centre • Expand after hours activities, encourage growth in business tourism as a conference

location that takes advantage of North Sydney’s identity as a business hub, its location, access and views,

• Provide a variety of high quality civic and public spaces …which can be utilised for a range of cultural and entertainment activities

• Improve amenity by reducing the impact of vehicles on pedestrians. The Plan identifies a job target to 2036 for the North Sydney LGA, in the range of 15,600–21,100 additional jobs. The draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan was developed in the lead up to the release of the Draft North District Plan in late November 2016. The draft Masterplan was therefore prepared without the benefit of the draft North District Plan’s directions and provisions. 1.3 North Sydney Community Strategic Plan 2013 – 2023 North Sydney Council’s Community Strategic Plan (CSP) identifies the community's main priorities and aspirations for its future and sets out strategies for achieving these outcomes. The Plan contains general guiding directions on improved and enhanced infrastructure, assets and facilities, sustainability in transport, strong and sustainable local economies and supporting active and healthy communities. The Community Strategic Plan 2013-2023 has consistently emphasised the importance of North Sydney Centre as a destination for commercial and economic activity. If properly planned for, the combined result could contribute to a North Sydney CBD that is far more active through a connected, safe and high amenity public domain. 1.4 Vision, project objectives & principles of the project A guiding objective of Council’s Strategic Plan is to strengthen the North Sydney Centre’s role as a key component in Sydney’s global economic arc and the principle economic engine of Sydney’s North Shore. At the same time, we want to build on our existing and evolving assets to ensure North Sydney Centre evolves in a more attractive, sustainable and vibrant place for residents, workers, businesses and visitors. Council recognises that the Ward Street Precinct is a key step in transforming North Sydney Centre in a vibrant and engaging CBD. The following objectives and principles have been identified to guide the Ward Street Masterplan project.


(6)

1.4.1 Objectives The Ward Street Precinct and its role in the evolving city centre will include:

a) Building on the outcomes of the North Sydney Centre review and applying a precinct scale methodology.

b) Assisting property owners and Council by providing clarity on the future strategic growth of the precinct.

c) Providing a bold and vibrant public domain and built form response to the proposed Victoria Cross Metro Station.

d) Ensuring a built form response that effectively balances growth within the Centre and amenity to surrounding properties.

e) Improving the public domain across the precinct by identifying the precinct as a destination, via high quality new and embellished public spaces, that prioritise pedestrians.

f) Encouraging public and private development outcomes that activate the precinct, stimulating North Sydney Centre as a destination.

g) Ensuring that significant public benefit is achieved as a result of development that is seeking to amend the planning controls.

h) Identifying opportunities for the Council-owned Ward and Harnett Street car parks. i) Ensuring that community benefit is a key project driver. j) Ensuring that a financial return to Council is a key project driver.

1.4.2 Principles Council is committed to undertaking the Masterplan according to the following principles:

P1 Advocate design excellence, best practice and sustainability in both the built form and public domain.

P2 Capitalise on placemaking and land use opportunities associated with the proposed Victoria Cross Metro Station.

P3 Facilitate safe, attractive and high quality public and community spaces to best practice standards.

P4 Require universal access principles govern all new public and community spaces. P5 Ensure transparency where the leveraging of public benefits is pursued in exchange

for additional development potential. P6 Prioritising pedestrian amenity. P7 Advocate for a mix of uses to revitalise the precinct, with a focus on employment

generation, community spaces and the 18-hour economy. P8 Acknowledge that commercial amenity and viability of the North Sydney Centre is

critical to future investment and prosperity. P9 Ensure that total parking provision, including public and private parking assets,

delivers no net increase in traffic generated with the Ward Street Precinct and responds to the Victoria Cross Metro Station.

The above objectives and principles have informed the Draft Masterplan preparation to date. Whilst various submissions have suggested potential changes to the way these directives materialise within the Masterplan, the objectives and principles form the foundation of the project and will continue to govern the project direction as it evolves.


(7)

2. Outcomes of Public Exhibition

2.1 Public exhibition The draft Masterplan was placed on public exhibition between 26 January and 10 March 2017. The project was advertised on Council’s website, social media platforms and in several editions of the Mosman Daily. Over 6,500 letters were sent to owners and occupiers in the vicinity of the precinct. Information brochures were circulated and three precinct committees in the vicinity of the project were addressed. Hard copies of the exhibition documentation were made available at the Stanton Library and Council’s Customer Services Centre for the duration of the consultation. 2.2 Submissions overview In response to the exhibition, 30 submissions were received, raising a variety of issues. More than half of these complimented Council on its initiative and supported the significant contribution the project is seeking to make to the public domain. The variety of issues raised generally fall into the following broad categories:

• Residential amenity impacts including solar access, views, wind and acoustic privacy. • East Walker Street opportunity site concerns • Traffic and parking • Scale and density of building envelopes • Heritage concerns • Public space amenity impacts • Security and antisocial behaviour • Rationale behind selection of opportunity sites • Financial feasibility • Commercial amenity impacts • Interaction with the Capacity and Land Use study • Concerns with existing controls of NSLEP 2013.

CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS In light of the recommendations of this report, it is expected that any significant changes made within the Masterplan will require further public exhibition, in line with Council’s Community Engagement Protocol.


(8)

SUSTAINABILITY STATEMENT The following table provides a summary of the key sustainability implications: QBL Pillar Implications

Environment The environmental implications of the proposed project are as follows: • Masterplanning of the precinct will result in improved urban outcomes,

particularly within the public realm, and make the North Sydney Centre more walkable, accessible and attractive.

Social The social implications of the proposed project are as follows: • Improved street level amenity will make pedestrian journeys more

enjoyable. • Improved linkages between origins and destinations (train station, open

space, civic precinct and future metro station). • Making areas of high amenity more accessible for residents/workers. • New civic and/or open space in areas of high demand to operate as informal

community meeting places. • The redevelopment of Council land provides opportunities for significant

public and social benefit, including affordable housing, open space, and new recreation facilities.

Economic The economic implications of the proposed project are as follows: • Improved amenity within the North Sydney Centre will attract investment

and improve the status of the commercial centre. • Redevelopment of Council assets has the potential to significantly contribute

to Council’s continued financial sustainability. Governance The governance implications of the proposed project are as follows:

• Project aims to implement action 2.1.2.1.5 of the North Sydney Council Delivery Program 2013/14 – 2016/17.

• The Masterplan represents a step in the prudent management of Council assets.

3. Summary of Themes Raised During Consultation

3.1 Scale and density of building envelopes Five submissions expressed concern that the scale and density of the building envelopes envisaged are excessive. Conversely, three further submissions expressed concern that those same envelopes are too complicated and conservative and therefore not economically viable, missing a significant economic opportunity for the North Sydney CBD. As exhibited, the Draft Masterplan was intended to encourage discussion on how the precinct could be utilised to achieve Council’s identified objectives. Council now has some constructive feedback on how the community views the project to inform how the Masterplan might be further refined.


(9)

Ultimately, a balance of economic viability in building forms and protection of surrounds must be struck through a design-led process.

Action – Pursue further design refinement to ensure the Masterplan is envisaging commercially attractive envelopes that appropriately manage surrounding amenity.

3.2 East Walker Street opportunity site The East Walker Street opportunity site was included in the draft Masterplan due to strong development interest. In the scope of a new metro station 200 metres away, the North Sydney CBD immediately opposite and buildings of substantially greater height surrounding, this part of the precinct will undoubtedly be subject to ongoing development pressure. To effectively guide this pressure, further work is necessary to resolve the complex inter-relationship of traffic, heritage, view sharing and solar access issues. Such guidance should identify a suitable built form that delivers appropriate land-uses and public benefit to North Sydney. This exercise should be undertaken separate to the Ward Street Precinct Masterplan. The above discussed outstanding issues, fringe location of the site and resultant indirect contribution to the public benefit objectives of the Ward Street Precinct suggest this component is best investigated as an independent entity. This approach would acknowledge the above factors that differentiate this site from the precinct core.

Action - The East Walker Street opportunity site be excised from the Ward Street Precinct Masterplan project and separately pursued by Council staff.

3.3 Parking

The majority of submissions appreciated the potential for a vibrant and pedestrian friendly precinct is accompanied by a significant reduction in priority for public parking. Nonetheless, parking was raised as a concern in six responses from the residential community, reflecting various concerns for continued on-street parking and suggesting the need for new parking within the precinct.

As previously noted, some level of parking will be necessary to support the precinct in respect of commercial or hotel uses, servicing, disabled parking and vehicle critical journeys. These aspects can be accounted for in the further refinement of the Masterplan. As has been noted throughout this project, a primary catalyst for the Masterplan is the introduction of multi-billion-dollar public transport infrastructure immediately adjacent the precinct. Building on this, Council’s aspiration of an active and lively CBD, is one that can be supported by a reduction in private vehicle journeys and enhancement of the pedestrian experience. Excluding the Ward and Hartnett Street car parks, the Ward Street precinct contains 356 public and 1,046 private parking spaces. The remainder of the North Sydney CBD contains some further 2,600 public parking spaces across 16 parking stations. The positive growth and vibrancy of the North Sydney CBD rely on a stronger pedestrian, cyclist and public transport emphasis for the CBD.


(10)

Action – Critical parking needs be identified wherever possible in the further development of the Masterplan design, with appropriate consultant input to support proposed outcomes.

3.4 Traffic Traffic was raised predominantly by the residential community. The majority of these submissions raised concern about the impacts of increased residential density, particularly on Walker Street where road constraints and congestion are issues. The traffic report from ARUP, which was exhibited with the Masterplan, identifies that no increase in traffic is expected as a result of development envisaged in the Ward Street Precinct. This does not account for any potential increase in density on the East Walker Street site, discussed above in Section 3.2, which has been omitted as traffic impacts remain an outstanding matter and one that has prevented any future development capacity being further explored.

Action – The traffic implications of the Masterplan, as well as any further investigation of the East Walker Street site, should continue to be informed by appropriate traffic input.

3.5 Proposed pedestrian spine issue A submission received on behalf of 221 Miller Street identified an issue with the proposed pedestrian spine where it meets the rear of 221 Miller Street. The approved development, which is currently under construction on this site, has a vehicular access ramp in the location of the pedestrian thoroughfare and therefore cannot be used as envisaged. This will therefore need to be revisited through design refinement.

Action – Further design development will need to revisit the interaction of the approved development at 221 Miller Street and the proposed pedestrian spine.

3.6 Rationale behind selection of opportunity sites and Interaction with the North Sydney

CBD Capacity and Land Use Strategy The logic behind the selection of opportunity sites and the interaction of the draft Masterplan with the Capacity and Land Use Study was a point of concern raised in six submissions. The context and analysis document exhibited alongside the draft Masterplan identified that opportunity sites had been selected based on a criteria of “either potentially underutilised within the context of the North Sydney Centre, or likely to be the subject of development pressure in the future.” Five submissions noted that there are other sites in the precinct with potential to fulfil this criteria. Further refinement of the plan will allow these sites further consideration. In addition, the Capacity and Land Use Study omits sites within the Ward Street Precinct. This allows the Ward Street Masterplan exercise to apply a more detailed design testing methodology, looking at the individual impacts of each site to ascertain development potential. The draft Masterplan has not yet applied this methodology to all sites within the precinct.


(11)

Through further design development, it is proposed to conclusively identify whether the potential for additional height identified to some sites under the Capacity and Land Use Study is feasible and desirable from this more detailed precinct perspective.

Action – Clearly outline the criteria for opportunity site selection against each site in the precinct with a view to adding those with potential as ‘opportunity sites.’ For the purpose of market clarity, this should include those highlighted as having theoretical additional height potential within the Capacity and Land Use Study.

3.7 Financial feasibility The financial feasibility of the building forms indicated in the Masterplan was disputed by five submissions from the business community. In the process of development of the draft Masterplan, AEC Economic Consultants provided input at various critical stages. AEC advised the proposed built forms of the draft Masterplan were economically feasible, although noted the feasibility of the built form that fronts Berry Street was marginal. Consultation provided some valuable information to inform the future refinement of the draft Masterplan, particularly in relation to economic feasibility. It is appropriate to re-examine this with design refinement.

Action – Ensure the further design development of the built form Masterplan accounts for commercial viability as an important consideration.

3.8 Residential and commercial amenity impacts including solar access, views, wind and

acoustic privacy. Various issues of amenity were raised during exhibition, relating to solar access, views, wind and acoustic privacy. Through the project objectives outlined in Section 1.4.1 above, the draft Masterplan has endeavoured to balance the impacts of new development on existing and approved commercial and residential development. Accompanying increased development in the CBD and the development pressure resulting from infrastructure improvements like Sydney Metro, some impacts are a reasonable expectation in a contemporary CBD. Establishing an appropriate balance of these impacts will continue to be part of the design development and refinement process.

Action – Continue to ensure that impacts on surrounding amenity are a key consideration in the further refinement of the plan.

3.9 Public space amenity impacts The protection of public open space, both existing and proposed, was raised in the context of solar access by nine submissions. The views expressed in each submission varied. Concerns ranged from:


(12)

• The need to maximise and protect solar access to the proposed new public square. • Emphasis of the role of solar access in balancing amenity with expansion of the Centre.

In the context of a dense urban centre, a reduction in solar access is to be expected. • Support for the continued protection of solar access to Berry Square. • Objection to the continued protection of solar access to Berry Square.

In the context of a major CBD, the Masterplan exercise is inherently a delicate balance of public domain and built form priorities. This project has specifically placed focus on the quality of the public domain through the design development process and, consistent with the principles of the project, this will continue through refinement. Notwithstanding this, it should be understood that a reality of the CBD is that limited solar access is available at ground level due to existing and approved development around the precinct. The Capacity and Land Use study applied a criteria to the Berry Square Special Area, noting it is highly utilised and was worthwhile retaining as a solar access protected space. The draft Masterplan proposed to change the solar access control applicable to Berry Square from the existing 12 – 2pm, to protect solar access between 10.30 and 2pm. This allows that the control does not pose as large an impediment to development to the north, but still ensures solar access is preserved when it can be realistically achieved.

Action – Further design investigation will enable the variety of views expressed regarding solar access to various aspects of the public realm to be adequately considered.

3.10 Security and antisocial behaviour. Four submissions raised concern in relation to the proposed public square and associated spaces, and the potential for security and antisocial behaviour issues to compromise amenity. Residential amenity to surrounding buildings will continue to be an important consideration as the design develops further. There are numerous measures that can be built into the future design to address this, notably ensuring consideration of ‘safer-by-design’ principles and regulation of late trading intensity and trading hours appropriately.

Action – Incorporate safer by design principles into further design development and at the appropriate stage, ensure consideration of trading hours.

3.11 Heritage concerns Heritage was raised in relation to four sites, outlined as follows:

o 41 McLaren Street

The building at 41 McLaren Street is a locally significant heritage item. One submission argued that it is important that the heritage listing of a building does not sterilise the building in perpetuity.


(13)

Development can be undertaken to heritage items, if done so in a manner that is sensitive to the item’s significance. An example of this is ‘the Heritage’ development at 150 Walker Street. The additions envisaged to 41 McLaren Street within the draft Masterplan were the result of architectural analysis and involved the retention of those elements of the building that contribute to its significance.

o 201 Miller Street

The owners of 201 Miller Street raised concern over the impact of the proposed Ward Street tower to the heritage item. The level of separation provided to 201 Miller Street from any future built form on the car park site will need to be closely considered in relation to heritage significance in the refinement of the masterplan.

o East Walker Street sites

Six submissions received from the residential community suggested the sites at 173 – 179 Walker Street are heritage listed. These properties are not heritage listed.

o Hampden Street terraces

Concern originated from the heritage listed terraces on the north side of Hampden Street regarding the potential for these buildings to become isolated and overwhelmed by the scale of surrounding development. This concern is noted.

Action – Continue to ensure that specific heritage significance of various items around the precinct is a key consideration in the further refinement of the plan.

4. Other Matters to Be Addressed

4.1 Need for increased emphasis on commercial outcomes The Draft North District Plan (discussed in Section 1.2 above) and draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan, were finalised at relatively similar times and as such the ability to incorporate the key objectives of the District Plan into the draft Masterplan was limited. A central principle of the Masterplan project has been to promote commercial floor space. The Ward Street Precinct is a key opportunity for Council to support the objectives of the North District Plan in a cohesive and informed manner, while strengthening the economic and employment role of North Sydney CBD as part of Sydney’s global economic corridor. Now that the likely objectives associated with the District Plan are known, the Masterplan can be refined having regard to the State Government’s agenda for the North Sydney CBD. With the benefit of the Draft North District Plan document, it is clear that Council must place a greater emphasis on commercial development outcomes in the CBD. To do so, more capacity needs to be created. As identified in the North Sydney Capacity and Land Use Study, the ability for lateral expansion of the CBD is significantly limited and therefore vertical expansion is the primary option for which Council may be able to achieve its employment targets.


(14)

4.2 The expansion of the North Sydney Centre

Through the development of the draft Masterplan, it has become apparent that 45 McLaren Street, 150 Walker Street and sites on the eastern side of Walker Street represent anomalies in their exclusion from the NSLEP 2013 boundary of the North Sydney Centre. The geographic, development context and built form circumstances of these sites all suggest that they should be considered part of the North Sydney CBD, as it is defined in NSLEP 2013.

Action – Investigate the possibility, along with associated opportunities and constraints associated with the expansion of the boundary of the North Sydney Centre, to incorporate the full extent of the Ward Street Precinct.

4.3 Other Planning Initiatives in the North Sydney CBD

It is recognised that the Ward Street Masterplan area represents only a portion of the North Sydney CBD. It is important to note that Council is currently undertaking other important work that underlines its more holistic review of the CBD. Council staff are currently in the process of finalising a Planning Proposal for targeted building height increases in the Centre. This seeks to increase the commercial and employment capacity of North Sydney and remove the cap on development previously imposed in relation to capacity issues of the existing railway station. To support this, staff are in the early stages of preparing documentation for a Public Domain Strategy for the CBD. This will seek to integrate the private and public domain and investigate improvements. In addition to this, a consultant team has recently been appointed to prepare the North Sydney CBD Transport Masterplan which will seek to exploit and build on the benefits of Metro by enhancing the walking, cycling and public transport usability and attractiveness of the Centre. These projects, in combination, seek to embellish the North Sydney CBD’s employment capacity, competitiveness and amenity which will ultimately improve its attractiveness as a place to work, live, visit and invest in. 5. Way Forward The above discussion has suggested a number of actions, equating to the following proposed directions for the future progression of the Ward Street Precinct Masterplan. The Masterplan will be refined by:

• Investigating alternative site ownership and amalgamation options.

• Considering a larger number of opportunity sites in the precinct, within a defined criteria.

• Providing development clarity for all those sites within the Masterplan area.

• Separating the East Walker Street opportunity site into a separate masterplanning exercise.

• Having regard to the Draft North District Plan.

• Ensuring heritage, traffic, residential and commercial amenity continue to be


(15)

considered.

• Seeking further advice on the economic viability of the proposed built forms. With regard to the above refinements, it is critical that to successfully achieve the desired Masterplan outcome, Council maintains the ability to holistically plan for the precinct in the first instance. Any pre-emptive lodgment of land-owner initiated planning proposals within the Ward Street Precinct has the potential to compromise this outcome. Accordingly, it is envisaged that proposals lodged prior to an endorsed Masterplan for this precinct will be met with a recommendation of refusal from Council officers. 6. Conclusion The public exhibition of the draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan has yielded some constructive advice from the community. It is now recommended that the Masterplan continue through a sequential phase of design development to further refine the plan, before undergoing a further period of community consultation upon refinement.

Public Exhibition of the Draft Ward Street Precinct Masterplan

APPENDIX 1 - Summary of submissions received

# Property Interest Key issues raised Detail / Issues Dated

1 General submission Resident • Traffic Concern that the project video shows a zebra crossing on Berry Street that

would be problematic for traffic flows. 1/2

2 General submission Resident • Support public

benefits Complements project approach and new plaza. 29/1

3 General submission Resident

• East WalkerStreetopportunitysite

• Traffic

Complementary of project.

Raises concern around East Walker Street opportunity site in respect of traffic. Makes suggestions for relocating Ausgrid site to East Walker Street.

14/2



• Heritage

o Congratulations on the project. Support for new Square and parkingremoval.

o Urge Council to be firm against removal of heritage listing of 41 McLarenStreet.

o Suggest removal of retaining wall on Walker Street for improved access.o Raises some concerns over uncertainty on East Walker Street site.

15/2

5

66 Berry Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Financialfeasibility

Commends Council for recognising the opportunity in this block.

Expresses concern over: o Financial viability concerns for the vision for 66 Berry Street.o Failure to recognise the crucial role 66 Berry St plays in opening the car

20/2

ATTACHMENT TO 1/5/17 Page 16

park site up.

6

138 Walker Street, North Sydney

Resident


Expresses concern over: o Concern over lack of clarity of what will occur on the East Walker Street

site.o Raises concern over traffic impacts of any further development on the East

Walker Street site.

8/3

7


Commercial interest

• Financialfeasibility

• Interactionwith theCapacity andLand UseStudy

• Raises issueswith NSLEP2013 controls

Expresses concern over: o Insufficient financial incentive for 66 Berry Street to contribute to the vision

for this site.o The proposed controls of the Masterplan will constrain development

potential of 66 Berry Street.o A lack of detail of the demand or policy drivers for a hotel in this area.o Masterplan does not address the Berry Square Special Area, as the Capacity

Study noted it would.

Objects to the current special area control protecting Berry Square, as it has insufficient public value.

Suggests: o It is more logical to amalgamate 56 and 66 Berry Street with the car park for

a larger floor plate.o The findings of the North Sydney Centre Commercial Study be considered

more closely in further development of the plan.

8/3

8


Resident


Residents of the Heritage building generally support the Masterplan.

Raises concern over

6/3


• Residential

amenity impacts.

• Security and antisocial behaviour.

o East Walker Street opportunity site. Objects to any development outcome over seven stories on this site.

o Concern over amenity impacts to the Heritage Building due to Community Centre and Harnett Street access to new square.

o Noise related amenity - recommend all trade be required to cease by 10pm, with appropriate security measures.


• Scale and density of building envelopes

• Public space

amenity impacts

The Masterplan has great merit. Suggestions made regarding: o The amenity and success of the plaza will rely heavily on surrounding

building height, shadowing at all times and day and wind tunnel effects. o Consider one floor less on the community hub building for more amenity

and solar access into the new square. o East Walker Street site should respond to topography of the valley similar to

NOC Plaza.

Objects to any buildings beyond the height of LEP 2013: o Buildings at RL 200 and 206 are too big and overwhelm the public domain. o These buildings are disrespectful to the built environment and thumb their

noses at LEP 2013.

5/3

10


Resident

• East Walker Street opportunity site

• Residential

amenity impacts.

Objects to the East Walker Street opportunity site: o The site should be removed from the Precinct as it is solely residential, not a

mixture like the rest of the precinct. o The site presents issues of traffic, heritage, shadow, wind impacts. o Any future development on this site should maintain the current controls.

10/3


• Traffic

11


Resident

• Scale anddensity ofbuildingenvelopes

• Traffic andparking


• Residentialamenityimpacts.

Council should be complimented on the foresight and initiative involved in developing this plan.

Expresses concern over: o Concentration of development shown on the Ward Street car park site.o The absence of any plan to address the need for additional parking in the

area and increased traffic generation.o The lack of detail provided for the East Walker Street site.o Lack of consideration of impacts from the approved development at 168

Walker Street.o The accuracy of data provided in ARUP Traffic Report.

Submission suggests the properties on the east side of Walker Street were or are, heritage listed.

7/3 & 8/3

12


Resident

• Scale anddensity ofbuildingenvelopes



Council should be complimented on the foresight and initiative involved in developing this plan.

Expresses concern over: o Concentration of development shown on the Ward Street car park site.o The absence of any plan to address the need for additional parking in the

area and increased traffic generation. o The lack of detail provided for the East Walker Street site.o Lack of consideration of impacts from the approved development at 168

Walker Street.

Submission suggests the properties on the east side of Walker Street were or are, heritage listed.

7/3



13


Resident



• Security andantisocialbehaviour.

Expresses concern over: o Amenity impacts from East Walker and Ward Street buildings due to

congestion, road safety, air pollution and vehicle pollution issues.o Harnett Street will be subject to noise, antisocial behaviour and security

issues.o Development on East Walker Street site will have impacts of solar access,

view loss, privacy.

Suggests a better balance needs to be found to maintain leafy character at present rather than a commercial hub.

10/3

14


Resident




• Heritageconcerns

Expresses concern over: o Road safety and traffic and congestion in Walker Street with increased

development.o Wind tunnel, loss of light.o Loss of architectural fabric on the east side of Walker Street.

10/3

15 124 Walker Street,

Commercial interest

• Commercialamenity Indicates support for the rejuvenation of the precinct, the key moves that seek to

improve connectivity, public domain and activity. 10/3


North Sydney

impacts. • Rationale

behind selection of opportunity sites.

Expresses concern over: o Negative consequences of 56 Berry Street building envelope on 124 Walker

Street. o Overshadowing impacts on Berry Square as an important open space. o Council’s public domain initiatives alone will be enough to address the City

Centre problems or achieve the Masterplan vision. Recommends: o City of Sydney shadow parameters be adopted that protect solar between 14

April and 31 August. o Mixed-use development be allowed on the southern side of Berry Street to

provide greater opportunity to achieve the desired vibrancy.

16

229 and 231 Miller Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Rationale behind selection of opportunity sites.

• Interaction

with the Capacity and Land Use study.

• Residential

amenity related impacts.

Supports the objectives of the Masterplan. Expresses concern over: o A lack of clear criteria and analysis of the precinct to identify opportunity

sites. o 229 and 231 Miller Street not being considered as opportunity sites. o Insufficient acknowledgement of the outcomes of the Capacity Study, which

suggested 229 and 231 Miller could accommodate additional height. o Inadequate consideration of impacts on 229 Miller Street from the suggested

building form at 41 McLaren Street. Suggests: o A full review of all sites in the precinct is necessary to ensure transit

oriented development is taken advantage of. o 229 and 231 Miller Street can both accommodate additional height without

overshadowing the proposed Square.

10/3


Submission provides guidelines upon which the Masterplan analysis presented should be revised, reflecting the above issues.

17 General submission

Advocacy group

• Public spaceamenityimpacts

Provides suggestions in relating to the success of public spaces: o Berry Street and its intersection with Ward St must be easy to find from

Victoria Cross and Mount St.o Clear sight lines should be achieved between Berry Street and the central

part of the CBD.

9/3

18


Commercial interest

• Rationalebehindselection ofopportunitysites.

Expresses concern over: o Omission of 50 Berry Street as an opportunity site.o A lack of consultation with landowners

Suggests: o The site characteristics of 50 Berry Street are such that it should be

considered an opportunity site. o The findings of URBIS’ North Sydney Commercial Centre Study’ should be

considered.o 50 Berry has the future potential for an A grade office building and

amalgamation with neighbouring sites.o The proposed Miller Street linear plaza could link to a future redevelopment

of 50 Berry Street.

9/3

19

221 Miller Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Residentialamenity relatedimpacts.

• Public spaceissue.

Expresses support for o Activation, community facilities and plaza initiatives.o Supports the envelope controls to the Community Hub, 41 and 45 McLaren

Street.

Identifies issue with the proposed pedestrian connection at the rear of 221

10/3


Miller Street: o The link is incompatible with the approved development at 221 Miller

Street, which will construct a two-way vehicle ramp in this location. The likelihood of pedestrian – vehicle conflict.

o Request removal of pedestrian connection in this location. Raises issue with the proposed Ward Street tower: o The tower has significant amenity implications for the approved

development at 221 Miller Street, including: daylight, view issues as a result of 6.4 metre separation, which is less than ADG.

Suggestions for the Ward Street tower: o 9 to 12 metres separation to the boundary with 221 Miller Street should be

provided. o Podium height should be reduced to RL 92 to match 221 Miller’s podium

for a human scale to NOC Square.

20

229 and 231 Miller Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Interaction with the Capacity and Land Use study.

• Rationale


• Residential

amenity related impacts.

Expresses objection in relation to: o The Masterplan being inconsistent with the North Sydney Centre Capacity

and Land Use Study in relation to 229 and 231 Miller and 41 McLaren Street.

o Masterplan providing inadequate consideration of impacts of uplift to 41 McLaren Street upon 229 Miller Street.

o No comprehensive heritage assessment has been done to support additions to 41 McLaren.

o Height discrepancy that occurs with 41 McLaren Street RL. o Inadequate consideration of benefits of uplift to 229 and 231 Miller Street. Suggests: o Additional height will not have any additional shadow impact on the

proposed NOC Square.

10/3


• Heritage

concerns • Scale and

density of building envelopes

o Contributions could be made for Miller Street Linear Plaza or public access along the northern boundary of 229 Miller Street in exchange for more height at 229 and 231 Miller Street.


• Public space amenity impacts

Submission questions the viability of proposed plaza given topography changes that occur through the precinct.

11/3

22

201 Miller Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Commercial amenity impacts.

• Public space

amenity impacts

• Scale and


Supports the project and public domain offering contributing to urban quality and vibrancy. Expresses concern over: o Very large tower or towers on the rear boundary of 201 Miller Street and the

impacts of loss of sunlight, views, aspect, heritage and sense of closing in. o Masterplan does not include analysis or potential future interface to 201

Miller, even though it is heritage. o The built form proposed limits solar to the proposed public space. Suggests separation in accordance with the ADG should be incorporated to ensure 201 Miller Street is not sterilised.

10/3

23

70 – 74 Berry Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Raises issues with NSLEP 2013 controls

Submission identifies the owner’s intention to complete decommissioning work on 70 – 74 Berry Street, demolish all structures and present a vacant commercial site to the market. Submission expresses objection to:

10/3


o Reference to an adaptive reuse of the building on the site, as this not realisable. The Masterplan therefore must delete these references and contemplate a new commercial building.

o The restriction to a relatively low building mass applicable to 70 – 74 Berry Street in comparison to its neighbours.

o The existing LEP solar access restriction of Berry Square Special Area, as it devalues 70 – 74 Berry Street.

Suggests that should the proposed Square eventuate, this would be a more important public space. The Berry Square ‘Special Area’ should then be deleted.

24


Resident

• East Walker Street opportunity site

• Traffic and

parking

Submission expresses support for: o The Masterplan initiative. o The use of the car park for a Square and the contribution to liveliness in

North Sydney o Sympathetic development. Expresses concern over: o The East Walker Street site, where buildings should maintain their current

height control. o Traffic and parking becoming unmanageable if the area is made denser,

even with a new Metro.

9/3

25


Commercial interest

• Interaction with the Capacity and Land Use study.

• Rationale

Submission expresses support for the Masterplan initiative. Raises issue with: o No site specific analysis is identified to explain opportunity site approach. o The Capacity Study suggestion of RL 126 as feasible for 76 Berry Street,

however there is no elaboration in the Masterplan.

17/3



• Raises issues

with NSLEP 2013 controls

o A lack of rigorous market feasibility testing to ensure incentives have been built in.

o The lack of additional capacity for employment growth identified by the Masterplan, given the combination of Sydney Metro, North District Plan and need for North Sydney Centre to expand vertically.

Recommends: o Expansion of the Masterplan scope to place more emphasis on unlocking

strategic commercial sites to capitalise on Metro. o The revisiting of LEP solar protection to Berry Square and Dorris Fitton

Park. The controls overstate the value of these spaces. o A review of the existing controls of NSDCP 2013 should be undertaken as a

number of existing provisions unreasonably limit development potential in the precinct.

Submission suggests that a future redevelopment of 76 Berry Street could support the urban design objectives for the precinct, involving improved links to the proposed Square with the adjacent substation and improved street frontages. Submission provides a solar analysis of 76 Berry Street that shows an indicative building envelope on the site does not impede existing shadow to Berry Square after 10.30am or Dorris Fitton Park before 2pm.

26

Hampden Street, North Sydney

Resident

• Traffic and parking

• Residential

amenity impacts

• Heritage

concerns

Submission indicates general support for the intention and community benefit of the Masterplan. Expresses concern over: o The Masterplan reducing the amount of street parking in Hampden Street

and adjacent streets, while increasing the number of residents. o Amenity impacts of additional large development including light, noise and

amenity on existing residents.

9/3


o That the exclusion of heritage terraces on the north side of Hampden Street may isolate residents. Suggests the terraces should be included in the Masterplan and have their zoning reviewed. Concern their exclusion will result in the terraces becoming an island surrounded by high rise.

27

45 McLaren Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest

• Financial feasibility

• Scale and


Submission broadly supports the changes proposed in the Masterplan. Recommends the envelope indicated for 45 McLaren Street should be amended to increase depth and height to ensure feasibility and compliance with the ADG. Suggest no height limitation, only requirement to not overshadow the proposed Square. Submission highlights: o The ability of 45 McLaren Street to comply with ADG solar requirements is

limited by 168 Walker St. Suggest this will be offset by views obtained, which would be allowed for with more height.

o 45 McLaren Street is unable to have shadow impact on NOC Square after 10.35am. RL 100 limit on 45 McLaren Street is therefore unnecessary.

o The approved building at 168 Walker Street will be some 65 metres taller than the envelope for 45 McLaren. A better built form response is needed. RL 100 appears arbitrary.

The submission provides three built form massing and floor plate suggestions that it suggests are more financially feasible. All options increase height and depth of the envelope.

17/3

28 Milson Precinct

Precinct Committee

• Traffic and parking

• Public space

amenity

Indicates support for the Masterplan, particularly open spaces and considerable community spaces. Raises concern over:

9/3


impacts • Residential

amenity impacts – acoustic privacy

• Security and

antisocial behaviour.

o Shadow diagrams show only 2 hours of solar access to open spaces. Longer would be appreciated and would raise amenity.

o Noise and disruption after hours. Suggest 9pm end of trade time. o A higher level of parking may be needed than the Masterplan suggests. Also

consider bike parking and end of trip facilities. Makes suggestions for: o A pedestrian tunnel under Berry Street that should link the new square,

station and Greenwood. o Masterplan should consider the need for aging in place, including

topographic challenges with this block. Advocates for elderly residents in public and private development of the precinct: o Public spaces should incorporate rest spots and benches for the elderly to

break the journey. Plug in charging stations and parking for scooters. More disabled parking.

o Suggest that developments above transport hubs incorporate other facilities and incentivise the developer through additional floor space dedicated retirement living uses only.

29

41 McLaren Street, North Sydney

Commercial interest


• Financial

feasibility


NOTE: The owners of 41 McLaren Street prepared a submission of significant size, the detail of which is more than can be captured by this summary. The below is a significant abbreviation of the content of this submission and seeks only to capture the primary message of each component of the submission. It should not be interpreted as a comprehensive summary of its detail. The submission states the objectives of Council’s Draft Masterplan are laudable and agreed. The submission contests:

17/3


o The masterplan presents building forms that are not economically viable and

do not yield the best possible advantage to Council or the public. o There are options to provide viable built forms with double the public

domain (with a similar area sunlit), achieving A grade office space, multiplying office space provision 5-fold, offers a new Seidler designed tower, provides a four-star hotel, enables visual connection between Berry and McLaren Streets and provides an additional 347 apartments.

The submission provides significant detail of two alternate Masterplan schemes, building forms and critique of the Draft Masterplan, including suggestion of an ‘alternative Masterplan’ and a ‘Visionary Masterplan’. The proponent’s Alternative Masterplan entails: o 56 and 66 Berry Street amalgamating with Council’s car park site. A

commercial building of RL287 accommodated on the site. o 41 McLaren Street have a residential tower placed above the existing

commercial building with height of RL 219. o A pedestrian axis / main street connect Berry and McLaren Streets, mid-

block. Active uses front the length of the pedestrian axis.

The proponent’s Visionary Masterplan entails: o 56 and 66 Berry Street amalgamating with Council’s car park site. A

commercial building of RL287 accommodated on the site. o 41 McLaren Street have a residential tower placed above the existing

commercial building with height of RL 250. o A pedestrian axis / main street connect Berry and McLaren Streets, mid-

block. Active uses front the length of the pedestrian axis. The proponent’s submission seeks to replace the independent Community


facilities hub building envisaged in the Masterplan with space in the podiums of buildings envisaged fronting Berry Street and 41 McLaren Street. Submission overview and recommendations The submission raises the following points: o There is no consideration of site amalgamation for 20 Ward Street, 56 and

66 Berry Street. o The Masterplan indicates office floor plates that are too small and unviable. o The amount of commercial office space is less than that stated. o The Hotel floor plate is too small to be viable. o The floor space efficiencies provided are inconsistent and implausible. o There is no discussion about the appropriate development control options

for sun access to Berry Square. o The additional height for 41 McLaren Street is wrong. o There is no discussion about the range of criteria for setting building

heights. o There is no discussion about potential development scenarios for towers

above the metro Station. o There is no examination of built form options and open space. There is no

analysis of the usage patterns of Berry Square. o There is no details analysis of lateral expansion of the Centre. o There is no discussion of targets in regards to affordable long term rental

housing. o The overshadowing analysis by the Draft Masterplan is inaccurate. The submission makes the following recommendations: o The North Sydney Centre should be expanded to include all of the Ward

Street Precinct. o An alternative set of development controls should be provided for the


amalgamation of 20 Ward Street, 56 and 66 Berry Street properties. o Provide alternative development controls for 41 McLaren Street o A property economic review by Council is needed before finalising the

exhibited Draft Masterplan. o Solar access controls for Berry Square should be reconsidered by Council. o Kickstart the Precinct with a Planning Proposal for 41 McLaren Street. Appendix 1 – Solar access report: o Solar access under the draft Masterplan is less than the document states,

when higher precision software is used. o Both alternative and Visionary Masterplans avoid overshadowing of

residential areas on the eastern side of Warringah Expressway before 2pm. o Various solar access scenarios are presented, comparing the Draft

Masterplan with solar access outcomes for the proponent’s ‘Alternate’ and ‘Visionary’ Masterplans.

o Contest the emphasis that has been place on the role of solar access, in balancing amenity with expansion of the Centre. In the context of a dense urban centre, reduction is to be expected.

Appendix 2 – Solar access assessment – existing residential o Provides detail of solar access to surrounding residential buildings involved

in Council’s Draft Masterplan vs the proponent’s ‘Alternative’ and ‘Visionary’ Masterplan schemes.

Appendix 3 – Masterplan Schedules o Provides a comparison of the metrics involved in Council’s Draft

Masterplan vs the proponent’s ‘Alternative’ and ‘Visionary’ Masterplan schemes.


Appendix 4 – Visual Impact Assessment o Provides an overview of the visual impact of the proponent’s ‘Alternative’

and ‘Visionary’ Masterplan schemes. Appendix 5 – Public domain plan o Provides detail of public domain layout and components. Appendix 6 – Property Council of Australia schedule o Provides detail on the specifications considered to be A-grade for

Commercial office space. Appendix 7 – Traffic report contests o The Alternative masterplan would generate traffic movements that are

generally consistent with that which currently occur and is unlikely to have a material impact on the overall performance of intersections in the locality.

o Doesn’t examine the Visionary Masterplan. Appendix 8 – Colliers Economic viability contests o The building forms presented in the Draft Masterplan are not viable or are

compromised o There are too many buildings being integrated into the centre of the

precinct, fragmenting the space unnecessarily and will result in the precinct being book-ended by existing buildings. Looking at the entire site from Berry Street through to McLaren Street has greater merit.

o Various issues exist with the hotel and commercial components including too small or irregular floorplates,

o The mix of uses in the southern component of the draft Masterplan do not


integrate well. o The prospect of the development shown at 41 McLaren Street occurring is

extremely low. o The Alternative Masterplan:

o Is far simpler in design and proposes uses that integrate better. o Splits the site into Berry Street and McLaren Street components that

are more likely to produce the commercial and planning outcomes desired.

Appendix 9 – Knight Frank Market Report contests o The proposed commercial floorplates at the Ward Street site are not

appropriate for the North Sydney market and unfeasible / unviable from a development / construction perspective for numerous reasons.

o The proposed hotel floorplates at the 56 – 66 Berry Street site are not appropriate for the North Sydney market and are unfeasible / unviable from a development/ construction/ operation perspective for numerous reasons.

o North Sydney Market overview suggests Masterplan does not address the commercial / hotel or retail markets.

Appendix 10 – GML Heritage o Additional development at 41 McLaren Street would positively support the

long term conservation of the building. o Retention of various components of the building fabric is desirable and long

term would be at risk without the development.

30 229 and 231 Miller Street,

Commercial interest


Submission provides sketches of alternative built form masterplan layout. Suggests a large building fronting Berry Street across 66 and 70- 74 Berry, cantilevering over a ground level thoroughfare connecting a mid-block Square.

3/4


North Sydney

• Financial

feasibility


• Residential

amenity impacts

Suggests the example of 8 Chifley Square building in Sydney CBD. The building cantilevers over the public domain and could a gateway opportunity to connect a future public square from Berry Street. Suggests an indicative massing. Details potential calculations and tender structures that may enable such a development.


Documents

Report to General Manager SUBJECT: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan - North … · 2018. 6. 22. · Report of Scott Williamson, Senior Strategic Planner Re: Ward Street Precinct Masterplan