Community Calls Upon Minister To Establish Planning Commission Now

The Hon Gladys Berejiklian MP
Minister for the Hunter and Transport
1 Farrer Place
Thursday, 22 May 2014

Dear Minister,

Request for the Hon Pru Goward MP to establish Planning Commission of inquiry to hear
objections to the current Newcastle revitalisation proposals and alternatives

Parks and Playgrounds Movement is opposed to the illogical termination of the rail connection to historic Newcastle. Trams are a separate issue and a tram network could be established for Newcastle and suburbs quite separately to the current rail debacle. The existing rail corridor from Newcastle Station to Hamilton Station is principally a question of Tram/Train rolling stock to be used between Hamilton and Newcastle or existing rail services with the re-establishment of the over bridges and level crossings removed in recent years.

We ask the Minister for Planning the Hon Pru Goward MP to establish a Planning Commission of inquiry to hear objections to the revitalisation proposals and alternatives in a fair open and transparent way.

The announcement by Planning Minister Brad Hazzard in March 2013 that the rail would be cut to Newcastle and a new Terminal Station and Interchange built at Wickham is the sort of arbitrary announcement that is not acceptable as a base for the Newcastle Renewal Strategy. We insisted at that time that an Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared and exhibited setting out the social and environmental impacts and alternatives to justify this extraordinary announcement. Because of the lack of official consultation it is essential that a Commissioner be appointed to hear objections to the Revitalisation Proposals. This is made even more important because of the extent of the current ICAC corruption inquiry.

The Movement has watched proposals for removal of rail connection to the city as since 1952. Such proposal may have had some sense in 1952 when private transport was beginning to supplant public transport but today they are misguided and based on a false understanding of the morphology of Newcastle and future trends in public transport. The Development Application for GPT is another outrage and blight on the planning history of the heritage city of Newcastle. GPT has had a negative influence and the current proposals are unacceptable.

Ironically the rot began when the Newcastle City Council adopted a special rate in 1988 over properties within the Newcastle Business District to fund the activities of the Newcastle CityCentre Committee (registered 1996 deregistered 2008). In 2000 the Newcastle Alliance Inc was set up by Newcastle Council to implement the Council’s Merchandising Plan. The Newcastle Business Improvement Association Inc. registered in 2011 is now Council’s recipient of the rate funds. These bodies have been Council Committees spending rate funds in excess of $10million dollars. An enquiry should be held into the amount of funds collected and how the funds have been disbursed. The Movement was particularly concerned when the Alliance, became involved in political advertising for the last state election.

 

We believe that the property lobby through the Hunter Development Corporation and Newcastle Alliance have pursued revitalisation without transparency and public scrutiny. The HDC’s life as a renewal body began in 1993 with the endorsement of the Honeysuckle ‘Approved Scheme’ by Minister Mr Robert Webster 15/3/93.

 

This Scheme prepared under Section 14 of the Growth Centres Act and ordered for implementation under Section 17 of the Act is an embarrassment in that it was never exhibited publicly and revised. The HDC has now been given reign over the whole Hunter region. Truly the HDC has done good work in the renewal of the former railway yards, Carrington and the Marina Precincts but has failed to implement their key objectives in the Honeysuckle Central Area. HDC encouraged existing development from the traditional CBD. (Notable examples include Hunter Water, the NSW Planning Department and Newcastle Museum) This has been the opposite of Urban Renewal and the Parks and Playgrounds Movement believes the HDC should now be disbanded.

Passenger rail services to Newcastle’s historic Station are germane to Newcastle Urban Renewal growth. The existing passenger rail stations are located in strategic positions within the identified renewal area and are the critical focus areas that should feature in any effective renewal strategy. Improved access to Wickham and Civic Stations as recommended by the Director General of Planning are 15 years overdue and should be implemented immediately.

1. Coal River Heritage Corridor: (Nobbys (Whibayganba) Aboriginal Dreaming site, Birth site of

Newcastle,1801 coalmining settlement, Lumber Yard, Macquarie Pier Port Development, Military
Works and Fort Scratchley)

2. Pacific Park Heritage Corridor: ( Convict Hospital and Convict Gaol sites and Customs House

3. Government House Heritage Corridor: (Earliest wharf and Government Administration Governor’s
House, Borough Council Chambers and King Edward Park)

4. Courthouse Heritage Corridor: (Newcastle Post Office, Historic Courthouse, Military Barracks )

5. Cathedral Heritage Corridor: Christchurch Cathedral 1828 focus of Town Axis, Cathedral
Cemetery, Borough Market and produce wharf (Queens Wharf)

6. Civic Heritage Corridor: (City Council and City Hall, Honeysuckle railway works. Civic Park and
Cultural Precinct).

7. Transport Heritage Corridor: (Great Northern Railway 1857, Newcastle Railway Station and Civic
Station, rail heritage)

 

Revitalisation has been progressing since 1988 but the integrity of the city renewal has been held-up by the straightjacket of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation and vested property interests for twenty years because they have been wrongly targeting the removal of railway services and destruction of the unique heritage values of the city of Newcastle.

We believe that the previous Minister for Planning acted recklessly in 2013 in announcing a termination of passenger rail services to historic Newcastle Station. He disregarded the rights of the disabled, the young and the elderly, indeed all railway users and the people of the region. The Planning Minister in 1998 should have directed the HDC to vary their approved scheme in accordance with the provisions of the Growth Centres (development corporations) Act to include the city’s heritage rail spine and comply with his Regional Environmental Plan Honeysuckle Amendment 3 shown below.

Under today’s circumstances the two new replacement Level Crossings should be completed at Steel Street and Worth Place. (The roads each side of the railway have been in place for many years) and the three pedestrian over-bridges should be replaced at convenient locations between Wickham and Newcastle. The only other logical way to modify the rail is to introduce a number of Tram/Train carriages to run continuously between an improved terminal station at Hamilton and a revitalised Newcastle Station with a proposed Arrival/Departure concourse featuring views to heritage building and providing , travel facilities and food outlets. This could allow for as many road or pedestrian crossings as required in the future.

 

The Newcastle Railway Station is a heritage place having the distinction of being a unique terminal station of the Great Northern Railway which is the second passenger rail system in NSW (Newcastle to Maitland-1857). The existing station is beautifully situated in the heart of historic Newcastle close to the harbour Foreshore and the Newcastle Beaches. It is listed on the NSW State Heritage Register and is surrounded by other State Heritage Items including the Coal River Precinct, Nobbys Headland and Fort Scratchley and the Convict Lumber Yard. The wonderful Customs House with its distinctive clock tower and Time Ball and the Great Northern Hotel are heritage listed sites adjacent to the station. Many elderly and disabled people as well as commuters from the Central Coast and from the Hunter Valley including Maitland travel to Newcastle rail station to access this unique destination and appreciate its excellent accessible platforms with their easy access to the harbour and Stockton Ferry wharf and bus terminal.

 

Newcastle Railway Station is a heritage place of distinction with many State Heritage listed Items

The Movement proposed that an Arrival/Departure Concourse be established as an activity hub at the rail terminal.

The mistakes of HDC, for example, in buying the longshore wharfs and removing them. The building-out of the planned Flinders Cove project which was a feature of the 1993 Civic Design proposal was a mistake as was the destruction of the view corridor from Merewether Street to the harbour with the ugly Crown Plaza Hotel development. It is essential that an independent Planning Inquiry be held to advise the Minister for planning so that the people of the Hunter region can be guaranteed a fair undistorted input to the decision making process.

Clearly there is much to be done to reappraise the Renewal Strategy in a fair and transparent way and retain convenient rail access and the heritage values of the historic Newcastle.

Yours faithfully,

Doug Lithgow
President Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc

A Rail Based Solution to Historic Newcastle Station

A Rail Based solution must be stressed to maintain cityrail services to historic Newcastle Station and protect Newcastle's foreshore from greedy property speculation. All rail crossings removed in recent years should be restored and new ones crossings created where needed. Rail is the way to go to Newcastle. See Cate Faehrmann’s question on the last day of Parliament.

NEWCASTLE RAIL SERVICE

Page: 23

Ms CATE FAEHRMANN: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport. Can the Minister confirm the Labor Government's current position in relation to cutting the Newcastle train line? Given that the Newcastle city renewal transport management and accessibility plan proposes to terminate the Newcastle line at a new Wickham station, will he rule out today, on the last day of sitting for the year, cutting the line at Wickham and maintaining the current service right through to the Newcastle terminus?

The Hon. JOHN ROBERTSON: The New South Wales Government is committed to the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district for the benefit of the people of Newcastle and the entire Hunter region. On 15 November the New South Wales Government released two transport studies that will contribute to the development of an Infrastructure Australia submission for the revitalisation of the Newcastle central business district. Both studies have been commissioned by the New South Wales Government and prepared by transport experts AECOM. The two studies have been provided to the Newcastle Central Renewal Steering Committee, which will develop the submission to Infrastructure Australia in consultation with local councils and the local community. The Government remains committed to a rail-based solution for Newcastle but recognises that work needs to be done to improve connectivity in the city centre. These reports provide some options for the steering committee to consider in consultation with the local community. Further questions on this process should be directed to the Minister for the Hunter.

GPT Pullout Provides City with a New Opportunity

GPT pulling out of Newcastle gives the city a new opportunity to identify the real issues and think of real people not just property speculation.

People with the future of Newcastle at heart may be interested in this letter P&PM sent to the Minister for the Hunter in July 2009. With GPT pulling out of their proposed Newcastle operation there is another opportunity to look at the real issues and the real people and not just the property speculators.

I think this letter is just as relevant as it was when it was written. It was the P&PM submission to the HDC Report. The HDC is not the sort of body that should produce such a report and it would be a disaster if this is to be their revised Approved Scheme under the Growth Centres Act slipped through as the 1988 Hurst CBD POM was. It sets out our attitude to the Report

Please read and forward on to friends if you think it a fair statement.

Doug Lithgow

Wednesday, 22 July 2009

The Hon Jodi Mckay MP Minister for the Hunter.
Governor Macquarie Tower
Level 37, 1 Farrer Place,
SYDNEY NSW 2000



Dear Minister,

HUNTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report to the NSW Government
March 2009

Parks and Playgrounds Movement wish to respond to the Report on the HDC Web Site and a News Release from the Member for Newcastle and NSW Minister for the Hunter titled Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report to the NSW Government March 2009

The Movement does not share the News Release enthusiasm for the Report on the HDC web site.

The Movement has seen many visions and rejuvenation reports come and go over the past fifty years. Sadly it is at the time of crisis as with the current World Financial Crisis and the December 1989 Newcastle Earthquake that vested interests promote visions and reports with little consideration of the interest of the general public. City planning must serve the general interest of the public and not be based on property speculation and arbitrary individual wants.

To be effective planning must be based on a realistic understanding of needs and the morphology of the City and this is best achieved by sound incremental development that identifies and protects the essential heritage features that give meaning and understanding to the development pattern while recognising the potential and problems of the future.

Minister for the Hunter Jodi McKay said there is no hiding from the issue of rejuvenating the Newcastle City Centre and the NSW Government wants the community to help shape the future of inner-city Newcastle and the Hunter region.

The HDC Report is full of motherhood statements that it then denies in its detail.

The Report is unmistakably biased and prejudiced against passenger rail services which are in reality crucial to the 21st century liveable city.

The report boils down to a plea for more money for the HDC and for the Commonwealth to finance the arbitrary movement of facilities to new locations.

A perfect example of this faulty thinking in action was when the Royal Newcastle Hospital was removed after the 1989 Earthquake from the Newcastle East where it had an excellent location and public access, to New Lambton Heights where it was sited on the Highway 23 road reservation causing intractable problems such as the requirement for a new and more environmentally destructive highway relocation and transport and access problems. The removal of the hospital from Newcastle has been the single most debilitating action in the old town. The HDC and City Council have been hiding from this fact and blame everything else but themselves for their action. No amount of residential redevelopment can return the activity that had evolved in that area around the Hospital over nearly two centuries.

The report makes a plea for money to finance four principal projects:

    * relocation and expansion of the University of Newcastle’s campus in the city.
    * relocation of the Court house and legal offices to the Civic.
    * removal of railway infrastructure from the city and construction of interchange facilities near Wickham.
    * redevelopment of Hunter St Mall.

None of these wish list projects really require the removal of the rail infrastructure from the city to be initiated. Indeed all of the projects if really needed would benefit from the retention of passenger rail services.

Ironically it is the Madison Wing at the Hospital site that was the first real university push into the city and that is earmarked for demolition!  Of course the university should be encouraged to consolidate its city campus and student accommodation but that will be much more successful with passenger rail services are retained.

The existing Court House precinct has a logic and distinctive presence that is capable of expansion where it is rather than be relocated at Civic. It would be far more logical to return the  NSW Department of Planning to the civic where it would have a logical presence as it used to have when the Northumberland County Council and the SPA were located at the Civic.

The GPT suburban mall type proposal should never have been facilitated by the LEP for the CBD. It will destroy permanently the historic Dangar Axis which defines the old cathedral town and will overpower the pedestrian scale of the existing Hunter Street Mall area with its ugly elevated carpking structure. This elevated parking structure will also obliterate the historic panorama from the Cathedral. The existing Market Street –Queens Wharf –Cathedral (Dangar Axis) link should be emphasised by any new development in the Mall area. Newcastle Council had an excellent proposal recently before it that satisfied this important criterion.

The removal of passenger rail services from Newcastle as proposed would wipe out the opportunity of Newcastle to show off its unique sense of place and prevent the Newcastle Lake Macquarie and Maitland urban area from having a transit orientated future.

The following check list is provided to help understand what is happening to Newcastle.

Living City – since HDC the city has declined, principally because of the1988 CBD Business Plan which was meant to revitalise the city has unfortunately become a blue print for its demise.

The $100 million dollars Building Better Cities funding which should have been used to create a public domain foreshore park extending the Joy Cummings 1981 Harbour Foreshore Scheme through to Throsby Creek was not well used. The public domain foreshore parkland is still needed as the centrepiece of the Central Honeysuckle development. The Honeysuckle Approved Scheme Masterplan proposed a rail overbridge crossing at Wickham which should have been built at the same time as the Carrington Bridge with ‘Building Better Cities’ money.

Economic Diversity - should be encouraged by developing the natural and heritage advantages of the City Centre. The positive promotion of the city has never been attempted and it is always stories of woe. We have a magnificent theatre in the Victoria Theatre but it is empty and we never have promoted and developed the positive advantages of the Old Town.

Revitalise retail – It is not practical or in the public interest to try to make the Cathedral town of Newcastle a Charlestown like suburban shopping mall. It needs to retain its traditional character and be a speciality market orientated place something like the university Cathedral town of Durham in England or like the Rocks in Sydney.

Commercial Investment- since HDC and the city centre Committee, the inner city has fallen prey to property speculation rather than to sound commercial development. This HDC Report unfortunately is heavily skewed in favour of property speculation rather than practical public interest planning for a future city that will feature Transit Orientated Development.

Public Transport – the report as shown above struggles to thwart the creation of a public transit orientated city by being prejudiced against our existing passenger rail infrastructure. Passenger rail services have been an essential and distinctive feature of the city of Newcastle for over 150 years. Yes the services should be improved and modernised and trains should not be stabled in the open foreshore corridor. Improvements should be made to Newcastle Station. The grand entrance reopened and an arrival and departure concourse developed.

Criticism of 8 car rail sets with only a few passengers have been made but Newcastle is currently the end of the CityRail electric service and 8 car sets will only be full when special events are planned in the city on the foreshore. There is no reason why sets could not be more often split into 4 car sets at Gosford for services on to Newcastle. Special daily excursions should be organised from Sydney and the Central Coast to visit Heritage sites, the Convict Mines, Macquarie Pier and Nobbys, Fort Scratchley and Christ Church Cathedral. These things are merely operational details that can be altered to fit circumstances. Newcastle never promotes its natural and historical advantages. We hope that the current passenger bus fleet will be replaced by lighter electric powered vehicles in the new city of the future.. If there is an interchange to be constructed on the City Rail network in the northern area it should be as planned at Glendale in the Lake Macquarie Local Government area where it is more central and supported by all the local Councils.

The proposals for public transport in the report are not well conceived and are not in the interests of the public who use public transport.

Revitalising the Hunter Street Mall, Celebrating the special character of Newcastle and improving the quality of the public landscape and obtaining a better standard of architecture in new buildings are matters we all strive for but they will not be achieved until we truly identify the problems and potential of the existing city and promote the city in a positive and practical way.

Yours Sincerely,

Doug Lithgow  Freeman of the City of Newcastle
Parks and Playgrounds Movement

TAKE THE LEAD FROM HISTORY

The Hunter Development Corporation (HDC) should be disbanded if they continue to operate without an appropriate approved scheme‏.

Dear Conservation Colleagues,

Parks and Playgrounds Movement have watched the Newcastle rail debate wax and wane since 1952.

There may have been some justification in down grading passenger rail then but it makes no sense in the emerging future. Balance between private and public transport in a transit orientated urban pattern is essential for the modern urban city.

Regarding the Newcastle situation I have enclosed the two concepts that have some statutory expression.

1.  The Joy Cummings concept that is embodied partly within the current (in force) planning scheme. (Never properly implemented)

2. The other has statutory expression under Growth Centres Act 1974 in the 1992 Approved Scheme of the Honeysuckle (Hunter) Development Corporation.

The HDC should be disbanded if it continues to operate without an appropriate ‘approved scheme’ that has real relationship to their Growth Centre which now includes all of the Hunter Region Local Government areas.

Parks and Playgrounds policy regarding the Newcastle Old Town and the foreshore is simple.

Parks and Playgrounds movement supports the retention of rail services to Newcastle and the revision and full implementation of the Joy Cummings Newcastle Harbour foreshore Scheme.

We call upon the NSW State Government to vary the 1992 Honeysuckle Masterplan using Sec 16 of the Growth Centres Act and retain rail services to the historic Newcastle station. All the previous rail crossings, pedestrian and vehicular should be re-established and new crossings built as needed.

We oppose the removal of rail services and the closing and redirection of Wharf Road and the alienation of the Harbour Front and railway station area for Hotel, Retail and Mixed uses as proposed in the Honeysuckle approved scheme Precinct ‘D’

Doug Lithgow President
Parks and Playgrounds Movement

SAVE OUR RAIL

Proposed legislation that would allow arbitrary alienation of rail easements must be abandoned

See ABC TV News Report:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2009/10/20/2719416.htm

T0:

Members of the NSW Parliament
Parliament House,
Macquarie Street,
Sydney NSW 2000


Dear Member of Parliament,

Thirty years ago the people of Newcastle campaigned to have their Harbour foreshore landscaped and the Coal River Convict Heritage site recognised and promoted. Progress was made but when the Honeysuckle Dev Corp was established in the early 90’s to take up the $100 Million Federal Building Better Cities money it wrongly focused on removing the whole railway when it should have concentrated on just removing the redundant industrial aspects. The improvement of the passenger rail corridor and restoration of the beautiful Newcastle Railway Station was a firm policy outlined in the official 1981 Harbour Foreshore Scheme and should have been promoted by the HDC.

The people of NSW are crying out for efficient and improved services. Not lengthened travel times and more inconvenience! The old steam Newcastle Flyer provided a more speedy connection to Sydney than the electric train services in the latest timetable!

The concept of removing passenger rail services is foolish and makes any plan that would make it easier to bypass parliament and remove rail easements is not in the public interest. Please oppose the Transport Administration Amendment (Rail Trails) Bill 2009.

Yours faithfully,

Doug Lithgow
Freeman of the City of Newcastle

Click below for Old Town Newcastle Link
http://tinyurl.com/yzomtbf

Open Letter to the NSW Planning Minister

The Email letter below and the attachments have been sent to the Minister for Planning the Hon. Kristina Keneally MP.

* What are the planning and development roles in the Hunter Region that have been given over to the HDC?

* Why did the HDC fail in the past to vary their Approved Scheme in accordance with their statutory obligations?

* What regional representation on the Board has been provided for?

* What actions have been taken by the Board to meet their statutory obligation to their total Growth Centre as constituted?

* What is needed to make their actions responsive and more transparent to the regional electorate?

The public interest requires that these matters are professionally and transparently investigated and publicly resolved.

The rail issue was made intractable by the failure of the HDC to comply with Hunter REP Central Honeysuckle amendment 3 over the past decade and HDC’s apparent unwillingness or to respond to the Government or the people of the region. This has been made worse by the recent HDC Revitalisation Report being so biased in considering the role of the railway and provision of passenger rail services to historic Newcastle without any consideration of their obligation to the Growth Centre as constituted for the region. HDC has allowed rail crossings and overbridges to be removed and not replaced and criticises lack of connectivity.

P& PM resolved at its last meeting to request the Minister to hold an inquiry or for the parliament to hold an Legislative Council inquiry into the HDC.

July 26, 2009

The Hon Kristina Keneally MP
Minister for Planning & Minister for Waterloo
office@keneally.minister.nsw.gov.au


Dear Minister,

Reference is made to my Email on 12/5/2009 and your kind acknowledgment and your letter dated 3 July 09 - D09/2844

Our Email 12/5/2009 Email read:

You can readily understand how this cut rail stupidity which has gone on since the Newcastle Earthquake 20 years ago has destabilised the city and damaged the ALP in its heartland. The enclosed letter reveals how this situation developed. It is in your power as Minister for Planning to direct that a legal varying scheme be developed by HDC and approved. This is essential if this matter is to be properly resolved.

Minister, the Parks and Playground Movement was pleased to receive you letter which we believe means that you have directed the HDC to submit a varying scheme in accordance with the Growth Centre (Development Corporations) Act 1974.

Newcastle had been poorly served by the HDC Honeysuckle Board operating without a proper Scheme even after the Minister Craig Knowles made Hunter REP 1989 Amendment 3 Central Honeysuckle Dec 1997. We were outraged when we heard recently that the Minister for the Hunter had asked the HDC Hunter to prepare a renewal report for Newcastle. We knew that HDC had no legal scheme for their Growth Centre which as you know includes every Local Government Area in the Region.

Since our Email the HDC has displayed a report titled Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report to NSW Government March 2009 and we are pleased to attached a pdf file of our letter to the Hon Jodi Mckay MP Minister for the Hunter. We ask you to consider our letter to the Minister for the Hunter as a submission to the HDC report.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement request that you initiate an inquiry into why the HDC did not comply with the strategic direction of the Hunter REP 3 Central Honeysuckle made by the Minister for Planning in Dec 1997 and why the HDC (Hunter) did not prepare a scheme for the Growth Centre as required by statute when they were constituted by parliament.

Furthermore we would be grateful if you would direct that the HDC Board act in a transparent way and seek the views of the people of the Hunter Region when preparing the their revised Scheme for the Hunter Region Growth Centre as set out in the Schedule 1 of the Growth Centres (Development Corporations) Act 1974 Viz. Hunter Development Corporation: All those pieces or parcels of land within the local government areas of Cessnock, Dungog, Gloucester, Great Lakes, Lake Macquarie, Maitland, Muswellbrook, Newcastle, Port Stephens, Singleton and Upper Hunter as at 1 January 2008.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement would be pleased to participate in the preparation of a Scheme with the HDC and to place evidence before a public inquiry into failure of the Corporation to comply with the REP Central Honeysuckle or prepare a Scheme for approval.

We trust that you will enquire into HDC so that they are better able to fulfil their statutory responsibilities to the Hunter Region in the future.

Yours Sincerely

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

HDC Report Threatens to Remove Passenger Rail from Newcastle

Parks and Playgrounds Movement wishes to place the following supplementary submission before the inquiry because since our submission made on 23rd of February there has been a report made public by the HDC, that threatens to remove existing passenger rail services from the historic city of Newcastle NSW.

Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Australia



Dear Sir,

Supplementary submission Inquiry into the investment of Commonwealth and State funds in public passenger transport infrastructure and services

Parks and Playgrounds Movement wishes to place the following supplementary submission before the inquiry because since our submission made on 23rd of February there has been a report made public by the HDC, Hunter Development Corporation that threatens to remove existing passenger rail services from the historic city of Newcastle NSW.

The Movement would have liked to place evidence before the Senate Standing Committee Inquiry showing that it is a misuse of the Hunter Development Corporation to have it prepare a Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report that removes passenger rail services to Newcastle.

The Corporation was previously named the Honeysuckle Development Corporation and had been operating without an Approved Scheme since 1997. We can show that it has not prepared a Varying Scheme pursuant to Sections 14-16 Growth Centres (Development Corp) Act 1974 even though its Growth Centre has been extended from time to time and now extends with its name change to include all of the Local Government Areas in the Hunter Region.

In our earlier submission we wished to show how the $100million dollars directed to Honeysuckle under the Building Better Cities Initiative of the Commonwealth Government in 1993 was allowed to be misdirected by an endemic bias against the provision of rail services to historic Newcastle. The Corporation had continually denigrated the importance of rail services to the City and allowed the removal of three pedestrian overpasses and two at-grade controlled vehicular and pedestrian crossings in their development area whilst at the same time complaining that the rail services created a barrier. The 1993 Honeysuckle Scheme proposed the construction of a road over bridge across the rail at the Stewart Avenue. This bridge should have been constructed using Building Better Cities Funds but was not.

Furthermore we believe that the HDC did not fully achieve the purpose of the $100million dollar Building Better Cities Program which was ‘to promote improvements in the efficiency, equity and sustainability of Australian cities and to increase their capacity to meet the following objectives: economic growth and micro-economic reform; improved social justice; institutional reform; ecologically sustainable development; and improved urban environments and more liveable cities’.

Any new passenger transport funding initiative from the Commonwealth Government should be clearly directed to genuine transit orientated development and funds should not be used for removal of rail infrastructure or degrade the provision of passenger rail services to Newcastle as proposed by HDC Report to the NSW Government March 2009.

The Newcastle City Centre Renewal Report prepared by the HDC March 2009 is clearly biased against the provision of rail services to Newcastle:

* It is not fair in that it denies social justice to public transport users and those that rely on passenger Rail services.

* It is arbitrary in its promotion of the construction of a new transport interchange at Wickham for its development without proper regard to the wider region and the already proposed interchange for Glendale in the Lake Macquarie Local Government area which is more central to the lower hunter urban area and on the main line.

* The Parsons Brinckerhoff Identification of Preferred Scheme used to justify the general recommendation to cut passenger rail services to Newcastle is wrong in claiming Railcorp policy on level crossings (page 9) means that no new crossing for vehicles or pedestrians can be built to replace those removed. We are not aware of any policy that would prevent the construction of controlled railway crossings in NSW.

* HDC frails to promote Ecological Sustainable Development by their failure to support the continued provision of passenger rail services to historic Newcastle.

* The argument that the railway is a barrier to linking of the CBD to the harbour cannot be sustained because it is the HDC that has allowed the removal of crossing in their original Growth Centre Area and has not promoted their replacement.

* The HDC Report is dominated by unsubstantiated claims blaming the Newcastle railway as a straw man argument. It claims to promote an integrated transport concept which it also denies by its lopsided and narrow focus against passenger rail services to Newcastle

Future urban development will need to be based around sustainable innovation and increased efficiency that replace oil and herald a renewable green and polycentric City. The transport options that support this new resilient urban pattern will have to be new electric passenger rail services for fast cross and inter-city movement and a series of small scale electric bus and hybrid electric vehicles and a resurgence of cycling and walking.

The HDC Report sadly takes the wrong and arbitrary attitude to the future of passenger rail services to Newcastle and should not accepted as a base for Commonwealth funding.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement would be pleased to provide the Inquiry with documentation and oral evidence if called to the public hearings.

We trust that the inquiry will give weight to our submissions in its report to Parliament.



Yours Faithfully,
Doug Lithgow Freeman of the City of Newcastle
President of the Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.


Below is our February Submission


Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Australia



Dear Sir,

Inquiry into the investment of Commonwealth and State funds in public passenger transport infrastructure and services.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement is a community organisation established in the early 1930s. Its secretary was the C E W Bean, the historian, lawyer and journalist. It was brought to Newcastle in 1952 by R.E. Farrell, and continues the work to safeguard our Natural and Cultural Heritage. The Movement’s early work included the protection of the openspace provisions of the 1952 Northumberland County District Town and Country Planning Scheme.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement has been deeply concerned at the way funds from the Building Better Cities Initiative of the Commonwealth Government were allowed to be misdirected by the NSW State Government with respect to the Honeysuckle Development Corporation at Central Honeysuckle Newcastle.

We are totally opposed to the misdirected activities of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation over the past 15 years in continually denigrating the importance of rail access to the City and for allowing the removal of 3 pedestrian overpasses and 2 road crossings in their development and the current outrageous push to have the commonwealth fund the removal of direct railway access to historic Newcastle.

The Honeysuckle Approved Scheme 1993 adopted under the NSW Growth Centres Act of 1974 was flawed in that it did not acknowledge and blend with the 1988 Bicentennial harbour foreshore work which was partly funded by the a Commonwealth Grants used to implement features of the Winning Design from the International Competition that informed the Newcastle Harbour Foreshore Landscape and Urban Design which was published in 1982. The Competition was assessed by a team of noted Architects and landscape Consultants lead by Lawrence Halprin the internationally renowned Landscape Architect and Urban Designer of San Francisco.

The principal characteristic of the Foreshore design was the landscaped rail corridor providing a uniquely attractive rail entrance direct to the Historic Newcastle Railway Station.

The Movement would be pleased to present evidence to the Senate Standing Committee outlining why and how future funding can be properly targeted to improving all aspects to the railway access to historic Newcastle and promote historic Newcastle as a destination. We are adamant that commonwealth MUST NOT USE scarce public funds to further debilitate public railway access to Newcastle from its hinterland and the Central Coast and Sydney.

The enclosed essays are provided to demonstrate the Movement’s attitude to this issue and its opinion that Newcastle’s 150 year rail access and distinctive railway station is a boon to the city of Newcastle and can be integrated with future transit orientated development of the region.

Yours Faithfully,

Doug Lithgow Freeman of the City of Newcastle
President of the Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

Damaging Motion put and resolved by Newcastle Council without proper notice at Council Meeting 16/6/2009.

Kirsty Ruddock Principal Solicitor
NSW Environmental Defenders Office
York Street SYDNEY 2000

Dear Kirsty,

Damaging Motion put and resolved by Newcastle Council without proper notice at Council Meeting 16/6/2009.

Please find the enclosed Draft Minutes for the Newcastle City Council Meeting 16/6/2009 dealing with proposed action regarding the Bullock Island Rail Corridor. The Notice of Motion moved and seconded by Councillors Osbourne/ Claydon was duly advertised for debate in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

As you can see from the Draft Minutes, an unrelated Motion was moved during the debate by Councillor Buman proposing adoption of a Report of the Hunter Development Corporation and certain other actions. This unrelated Motion was accepted by the Lord Mayor for debate as Part B of the Bullock Island Motion that had been properly placed on notice by Councillors Osbourne/Claydon.

You will note that the matter caused confusion in the meeting when the mover and seconder of the Motion on Notice objected to the extraneous motion being debated as part of their motion. Part B was carried after five of the Councillors walked out of the chamber in protest.

I would pleased if you could give the Parks and Playgrounds Movement legal advice on the whether introducing an unrelated unadvertised matter into a properly constituted Council Meeting is lawful and whether there is a legal remedy available to the Community and the Councillors affected when actions introduced in this extraordinary way are adopted by the Council.

Is the decision made in this way null and void or is the Council bound by this decision on the adoption of the minutes at the next Council Meeting as a true and accurate record of the meeting?

Your urgent help would be appreciated as the HDC Report adopted proposes the closing of the railway to historic Newcastle as well as many wide ranging matters concerning the future of the City.

Yours Sincerely
Doug Lithgow
Freeman of the City of Newcastle
President Parks and Playgrounds Movement
http://www.geocities.com/parksandplaygrounds/
Blog: http://parksandplaygroundsmovement.blogspot.com/


Subject: NOM 16/06/09 - BULLOCK ISLAND RAIL CORRIDOR

Councillor Crakanthorp had declared a non pecuniary, non significant interest earlier and retired from the Council Chamber prior to the commencement of the item.

MOTION: (Councillors M Osborne/S Claydon)

Newcastle City Council initiate relevant clarifications or amendment to environmental planning instruments associated with the possible future use of the former Bullock Island rail corridor in Wickham (referred to as the "Possible Future Transport Corridor" shown on the gazetted Wickham Redevelopment Area Map (sheet WRA - 001) of the Newcastle City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2008) to ensure that:

1 the instruments reflect the objective of the Wickham DCP for stronger pedestrian links between the residential area and Wickham Park

2 the corridor is developed in accordance with the Wickham DCP and is retained for future pedestrian-friendly, ecologically sustainable transport (such as rail trams, light rail and cycleways) development, and

3 the instruments specifically preclude future use of the corridor for major road or heavy rail development

FORESHADOWED MOTION: (Councillors A Buman)

PART A

Newcastle City Council initiate relevant clarifications or amendment to environmental planning instruments associated with the possible future use of the former Bullock Island rail corridor in Wickham (referred to as the "Possible Future Transport Corridor" shown on the gazetted Wickham Redevelopment Area Map (sheet WRA - 001) of the Newcastle City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2008) to ensure that:

1 the instruments reflect the objective of the Wickham DCP for stronger pedestrian links between the residential area and Wickham Park

2 the corridor is developed in accordance with the Wickham DCP and is retained for future pedestrian-friendly, ecologically sustainable transport (such as rail trams, light rail and cycleways) development, and

3 the instruments specifically preclude future use of the corridor for major road or heavy rail development

PART B

Pursuant to council’s unanimous Motion on 2 December 2008 affirming our commitment to the revitalisation of the City centre as a key strategic priority, Council now resolves:

1 Council endorse the City Revitalisation recommendations of the Hunter Development Corporation Report “Newcastle City Centre Renewal – March 2009”,

2 The General Manager bring to Council a report detailing the items contained in the Corporation’s report which can be implemented by Council forthwith subject to funding provision;

3 The General Manager apply to the Major Cities Unit of the Australian Government for funding assistance to implement the recommendations of the Corporation’s report;

4 Council reaffirms its commitment to an integrated public transport system, including enhanced transport links to and from the City and the development of a modern transport interchange for future growth, and strongly advocates that the New South Wales Government endorses, plans for and fund the preferred transport options in the Corporation’s report in conjunction with the outcomes of Council’s Traffic and Transport Study including options for the Wickham Future Transport Corridor.


PROCEDURAL MOTION: (Councillor M King)

RESOLVED: (Councillor M King)

The meeting adjourn for a five minute recess.

The Council reconvened at 8.19pm.

POINT OF ORDER

That Part B be ruled out of order and is not relevant to the Notice of Motion.

The Lord Mayor advised that Part B addresses incorporates information which addresses Part A which addressed transport in the City so therefore he did not uphold the Point of Order.

Councillor Osborne moved dissent regarding the Lord Mayor’s ruling.

MOTION: (The Lord Mayor)

Chairman’s ruling be upheld.

The Lord Mayor called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, B Cook, B Luke and S Sharpe.

Against the Motion: Councillors S Claydon, M Jackson, M King, N Nelmes and M Osborne.

The Lord Mayor declared the Chairman’s ruling be upheld on the result of six votes to five votes.

RESOLVED: (The Lord Mayor)

Chairman’s ruling be upheld.

POINT OF ORDER

Councillor Nelmes raised a point of order in relation to the Foreshadowed Motion and that Councillor Crakanthorp had declared a non pecuniary, non significant interest due to his parents-in-law owning land adjacent to the Bullock Rail Corridor but he has not such interest on Part B which would not let him vote on Part B.

Councillor Nelmes stated that the HDC report is not just about transport. It was about very positive things such as moving the University to the City and how would such a topic have anything to do with Bullock Rail Corridor.

The Lord Mayor ruled on the Point of Order and declared that he did not uphold the Point of Order.

The Motion was put to the meeting and Councillor Osborne called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: Councillors S Claydon, M Jackson, N Nelmes and M Osborne.

Against the Motion: The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, B Cook, M King, B Luke and S Sharpe.

The Lord Mayor declared the Motion defeated on the result of four votes to seven votes.


FORESHADOWED MOTION: (Councillors A Buman)

PART A

Newcastle City Council initiate relevant clarifications or amendment to environmental planning instruments associated with the possible future use of the former Bullock Island rail corridor in Wickham (referred to as the "Possible Future Transport Corridor" shown on the gazetted Wickham Redevelopment Area Map (sheet WRA - 001) of the Newcastle City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2008) to ensure that:

1 the instruments reflect the objective of the Wickham DCP for stronger pedestrian links between the residential area and Wickham Park

2 the corridor is developed in accordance with the Wickham DCP and is retained for future pedestrian-friendly, ecologically sustainable transport (such as rail trams, light rail and cycleways) development, and

3 the instruments specifically preclude future use of the corridor for major road or heavy rail development

PART B

Pursuant to council’s unanimous Motion on 2 December 2008 affirming our commitment to the revitalisation of the City centre as a key strategic priority, Council now resolves:

1 Council endorse the City Revitalisation recommendations of the Hunter Development Corporation Report “Newcastle City Centre Renewal – March 2009”,

2 The General Manager bring to Council a report detailing the items contained in the Corporation’s report which can be implemented by Council forthwith subject to funding provision;

3 The General Manager apply to the Major Cities Unit of the Australian Government for funding assistance to implement the recommendations of the Corporation’s report;

4 Council reaffirms its commitment to an integrated public transport system, including enhanced transport links to and from the City and the development of a modern transport interchange for future growth, and strongly advocates that the New South Wales Government endorses, plans for and fund the preferred transport options in the Corporation’s report in conjunction with the outcomes of Council’s Traffic and Transport Study including options for the Wickham Future Transport Corridor.

PROCEDURAL MOTION: (Councillor M Osborne)

The matter be dealt with in seriatim.

A show of hands was called for which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: 7

Against the Motion: 4

The Lord Mayor declared the Motion carried on the results of seven votes to four votes.

RESOLVED: (Councillor M Osborne)

The matter be dealt with in seriatim.

MOTION: (Councillors A Buman/B Luke)

PART A

Newcastle City Council initiate relevant clarifications or amendment to environmental planning instruments associated with the possible future use of the former Bullock Island rail corridor in Wickham (referred to as the "Possible Future Transport Corridor" shown on the gazetted Wickham Redevelopment Area Map (sheet WRA - 001) of the Newcastle City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2008) to ensure that:

1 the instruments reflect the objective of the Wickham DCP for stronger pedestrian links between the residential area and Wickham Park

2 the corridor is developed in accordance with the Wickham DCP and is retained for future pedestrian-friendly, ecologically sustainable transport (such as rail trams, light rail and cycleways) development, and

3 the instruments specifically preclude future use of the corridor for major road or heavy rail development

The Motion was put to the meeting and Councillor Osborne called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, S Claydon, M Jackson, M King, B Luke, N Nelmes, M Osborne and S Sharpe.

Against the Motion: Councillor B Cook.

The Lord Mayor declared the Motion carried on the result of ten votes to one votes.

RESOLVED: (Councillors A Buman/B Luke)

PART A

Newcastle City Council initiate relevant clarifications or amendment to environmental planning instruments associated with the possible future use of the former Bullock Island rail corridor in Wickham (referred to as the "Possible Future Transport Corridor" shown on the gazetted Wickham Redevelopment Area Map (sheet WRA - 001) of the Newcastle City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2008) to ensure that:

1 the instruments reflect the objective of the Wickham DCP for stronger pedestrian links between the residential area and Wickham Park

2 the corridor is developed in accordance with the Wickham DCP and is retained for future pedestrian-friendly, ecologically sustainable transport (such as rail trams, light rail and cycleways) development, and

3 the instruments specifically preclude future use of the corridor for major road or heavy rail development

Councillor Crakanthorp returned to the Council Chamber at this point.

MOTION: (Councillors A Buman/B Luke)

PART B

Pursuant to council’s unanimous Motion on 2 December 2008 affirming our commitment to the revitalisation of the City centre as a key strategic priority, Council now resolves:

1 Council endorse the City Revitalisation recommendations of the Hunter Development Corporation Report “Newcastle City Centre Renewal – March 2009”,

2 The General Manager bring to Council a report detailing the items contained in the Corporation’s report which can be implemented by Council forthwith subject to funding provision;

3 The General Manager apply to the Major Cities Unit of the Australian Government for funding assistance to implement the recommendations of the Corporation’s report;

4 Council reaffirms its commitment to an integrated public transport system, including enhanced transport links to and from the City and the development of a modern transport interchange for future growth, and strongly advocates that the New South Wales Government endorses, plans for and fund the preferred transport options in the Corporation’s report in conjunction with the outcomes of Council’s Traffic and Transport Study including options for the Wickham Future Transport Corridor.

Councillor Jackson moved a motion of dissent on the Lord Mayor’s ruling that Part B be considered.

The Chairman’s ruling be upheld.

A division was called and which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, B Cook, M King, B Luke and S Sharpe.

Against the Motion: Councillors S Claydon, T Crakanthorp, M Jackson, N Nelmes and M Osborne.

The Lord Mayor declared the Motion to uphold the Chairman’s ruling was carried on the result of seven votes to five votes.

PROCEDURAL MOTION: (Councillor N Nelmes)

Part B lie on the table.

The Motion was put to the meeting and Councillor Jackson called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the Motion: Councillors S Claydon, T Crakanthorp, M Jackson, N Nelmes and M Osborne.

Against the Motion: The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, B Cook, M King, B Luke and S Sharpe.

The Lord Mayor declared the Motion defeated on the result of five votes to seven votes.

Following the discussion Councillors S Claydon, T Crakanthorp, M Jackson, N Nelmes and M Osborne left the Council Chamber.

The Lord Mayor put the Motion to the meeting and declared it carried.

RESOLVED: (Councillors A Buman/B Luke)

PART B

Pursuant to council’s unanimous Motion on 2 December 2008 affirming our commitment to the revitalisation of the City centre as a key strategic priority, Council now resolves:

1 Council endorse the City Revitalisation recommendations of the Hunter Development Corporation Report “Newcastle City Centre Renewal – March 2009”,

2 The General Manager bring to Council a report detailing the items contained in the Corporation’s report which can be implemented by Council forthwith subject to funding provision;

3 The General Manager apply to the Major Cities Unit of the Australian Government for funding assistance to implement the recommendations of the Corporation’s report;

4 Council reaffirms its commitment to an integrated public transport system, including enhanced transport links to and from the City and the development of a modern transport interchange for future growth, and strongly advocates that the New South Wales Government endorses, plans for and fund the preferred transport options in the Corporation’s report in conjunction with the outcomes of Council’s Traffic and Transport Study including options for the Wickham Future Transport Corridor.

Following this item Councillor Buman retired from the meeting at 9pm.