Draft Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework. Objection

Mr Rob Noble General Manager
Newcastle Council PO Box 489 Newcastle 2300

Attention Mr Ian Rhodes.

Dear Mr Rodes,

Draft Laman Street Civic Precinct Design Framework. Objection

The movement is pleased that Council has exhibited the Draft Design Framework that Council had developed last year. As you know we believed that the Draft Framework should have been exhibited before precipitous action was taken to remove the Laman Street group of trees.

These trees are much loved by the people of Newcastle and are the principal landscape feature in the Civic Precinct.  Council has on a number of occasions been preparing proposals for the Civic Precinct (Cultural Precinct) and all of the proposals have identified the importance of the landscape structure the Ficus trees provide. The Draft Laman Street Civic Design Framework is the first proposal that has focused on the removal of this important landscape feature. The argument of Risk Management has been poorly assessed and there has emerged another reason subsequent to the recent costly and unnecessary litigation in the Land and Environment Court.

Your attention is drawn to the ‘Internal Memo’ sent to all Councillors from the Executive Leadership Team 23 Sep 2010 signed by Judy Jaeger with the Subject Title ‘Commemorating the Anzac Centenary’.

It is rather disconcerting for a community group that has positively worked in the public interest for this city since 1952 to feel that the Civic Charrette was a charade and that Council had the proposals already formed which were not stated openly. As a member of the Charrette I was at the time concerned that we were going over the ground that many councils had previously identified. However there was one vaguely expressed proposal that really alarmed me concerning the building of an underground entrance into the Library.

It was put by the Facilitator and glossed over Judy Jaeger. I rejected the idea outright at the Charrette because even though I was not privy to the proposal that the Leadership Team was obviously preparing, I could see all the aesthetic and engineering imponderables hidden in the idea. Not to mention the problems with the Civic Park Fountain, the removal of the Memorial Grove and cutting the established Civic Axis and the destruction of the principal landscape feature the Laman Street Trees.

Of course the Parks and Playgrounds Movement want to see a high standard of Landscape and a unified scheme for the precinct. Our actions since 1968 when we prepared the first concept for the Civic Area are clear public evidence of our bona-fides. We have positively commented on every proposal for the area that Council has brought to the public.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement is conscious that the elected Councillors are the current trustees of Civic Park for the general public and we are pleased to submit the document Civic Park – Civic Precinct Design Framework 24/2/2011 as a contribution to help advise their guardianship. We would be pleased to make further submissions as required.


Yours sincerely,


Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

COMMUNITY ALERT - KING EDWARD PARK

COMMUNITY  ALERT

Alienation of Crown Land
1 Ordnance Street Newcastle -Newcastle City Bowling

Application for a Private Commercial  Function Centre with 41 Car spaces;
Hours 7am -midnight, 7 days a week.
Facilities for 500 people.

Once again Newcastle is threatened with inappropriate development.

The former Newcastle Bowling Club is part of King Edward Park and forms part of the Hill Heritage Area. The club existed from the end of the 19th Century, and in 1966 was granted a lease in perpetuity as long as it remained a bowling club. Approval for parking was never given.   It is zoned RE1, which prohibits the building of a function centre.

The area has been allowed to deteriorate, so that the enormous value of this site is obscured. It is a landmark site with magnificent views that anyone who has lived in or visited Newcastle will have appreciated.

The proposed building which claims to be on the original foot print is approximately three times the size of the original building and of a considerably larger volume. Viewed from the south, the two storey structure will present a severe visual intrusion into the park compared to the previous single storey building.  A small kiosk at the S.E. end of the proposed structure is the only part accessible to the public.  The rest of the building will be used for private functions. This is contrary to the principles of Crown land management.

This site should be returned to the Park for the enjoyment of all.

Our convict and colonial heritage is reflected in this site as it was here that the Nation’s first coal shaft was sited in the 1820s. With the old Government House, the James Fletcher site (that housed the Military Barracks and the first Hospital) and the Park, this precinct is important to all Australians.

Consultation with the community found that the community wanted the land returned to the park or at most, minimal development. However, these views were overruled in favour of the commercial alternative.  A Plan of Management was produced by the Lands Department in 2007. It is interesting that the Government’s own Plan of Management still proposed a much smaller development than the current proposal. The Current DA does not relate in any way to the Plan of Management.

Strong community support is essential in combating this proposal. You can help by adding your name and address to the objection letter on the back and by mailing or e-mailing to:

The Hon. Tony Kelly, Minister for Lands, Level 31, 1 Farrer Place, Sydney 2000, or
(landsquery@lpma.nsw.gov.au )

Please be quick: Also note that the Minister takes more notice of individual letters than they do of form letters. If you have time, write your own letter.
It is important to forward a copy of your letter to:

The Premier of NSW (premier@nsw.gov.au)
The Hon Jodi McKay PO Box 1816 NCLE 2300   newcastle@parliament.nsw.gov.au
The Lord Mayor Cr John Tate, City Hall, Newcastle 2300 kmcpherson@ncc.nsw.gov.au
The Leader of the Opposition LOP@parliament.nsw.gov.au
The Shadow Minister   michael.gallacher@parliament.nsw.gov.au


The Honourable Tony Kelly
Governor Macquarie Tower, Level 34, 1 Farrer Place Sydney 2000

Dear Sir

Re: DA No 10/1735 No 1 Ordnance Street

 I am deeply concerned about the above proposal. In spite of this application being put before the people over the Xmas holiday period and Council’s failure to advertise it on its Web page, hundreds of objections were submitted.

This priceless site is dedicated park land; Crown Land since 1863 and part of the Hill Heritage Area. It is zoned RE1 which prohibits the building of a function centre. When the bowling club failed, and its lease was revoked, the site should have been incorporated into King Edward Park according to the terms of that lease. Any future use should serve the Park and allow the Public unfettered access according to the principles of the Crown Land Act.

We ask that you re-examine the Conclusions of the Plan of Management (2007) which states that the community wanted the land returned to the park, or a development within the scale of the bowling club buildings.

We would like you to investigate why the Annie Street P/L proposal was awarded the tender when, without good reason, it deviates so far from the Expression of Interest.

This function centre holds 500 function guests and is available from 7am to Midnight every day.  Its footprint (understated in the DA) is almost twice the size stipulated in the POM and almost three times the footprint of the old bowling club. It relies on street parking. The Public has access to a small Kiosk on the S.W corner with limited views.

The State Government has a responsibility to the community to ensure that the DA currently before the Council complies with the Plan of Management and that the Plan of Management reflects the views of the community. The consultative process between State, Local Government bodies and Community Groups should be respected. The developer has ignored the constraints imposed by these documents, adding fuel to the fire of public resentment to the perceived and well publicised unsavoury relationship between Government Instruments and developers.

We ask that any lease agreements or MOUs you have with the proponent should be held- over or cancelled so that the matter can be reconsidered. 

Yours Faithfully

King Edward Headland Reserve DA 10-1735 Letter to General Manager

Mr Rob Noble
General Manager
Newcastle City Council,
PO Box 489
NEWCASTLE NSW 2300

3rd February 2011 with supplementary document 16.02.2011

DA 10/1735
King Edward Headland Reserve for Public Recreation within King Edward Park Newcastle.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement resolved at our January Meeting to submit an objection to the Development Application 10/1735 for No.1 Ordinance Street Newcastle, Proposed Function Centre Kiosk and associated carparking and landscaping with an exhibition period: 29 Dec to 3rd Feb.

The Movement has a long association with the Newcastle City Bowling Club and was party to the campaign to have the 1967 perpetual lease of the site revoked because of the irregularities in the running of the club and the fact that there had not been a bona- fide bowling club operating for many years.

Copy of P&PM Inc Letter re the alienation of the Park and irregularities re the Lease

Saturday, 7 July 2001

The Honourable Richard Face MP
Minister for Gaming and Racing and
Minister Assisting the Premier on Hunter Development
23 Smith Street
Charlestown 2290


Dear Richard,


Newcastle Bowling Club Licences – King Edward Park


Parks and Playgrounds Movement has requested that the Minister administering NSW Crown Lands to revoke the 1965 lease of the Newcastle City Bowling Club and return the land to King Edward Park and people of Newcastle. We trust that you will agree with this aim.


Newcastle Bowling Club which has been occupying the leased area of the Newcastle City Bowling Club has been in financial trouble and in the hands of a Receiver for sometime. It was recently voted that it be placed in liquidation. Two applications are currently before the Liquor Administration Board, one to change the name of the club back to Newcastle City Bowling Club (App No 196544 15/6/01) and the other for the appointment of a liquidator (App No 196644 19/6/01).


Parks and Playgrounds Movement is opposed to the transfer of Club Liquor and Gaming Machin e Licences to the Newcastle City Bowling Club and we seek the abandonment of the existing club.


King Edward Park is Newcastle’s premier coastal parkland dedicated for public recreation 1894


The official lease for Newcastle City Bowling Club was granted in 1965 with the condition that the leased area be used for “bowling club buildings and recreation, bowling greens”.


The land is crown land and is zoned for open space and recreation.


We believe that the Newcastle City Bowling Club is no longer a bona-fide bowling club and that the lease should be revoked and the area revert to King Edward Park.


Members of the Bowling Club have alleged that the directors of the club have not notified members of meetings and have acted in a manner that has not been in the interests of the club.


We request that a public hearing be held before any transfer of the licence is contempt.


The Movement would be pleased if you could establish an inquiry into the activities of the club and ensure that this important part of King Edward Park is not permanently alienated.


Yours sincerely,


Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement

The 40 acre Reserve which was to become King Edward Park was gazetted for Public Recreation 16 July 1863, on the request of the Newcastle Borough Counc il. The alienation of Newcastle’s premier park is of great public importance and deserves close scrutiny.

We base our objections on the heritage of the Park and the convict mining History.

· The previous submissions re the termination of the Bowling Club Lease.
· The Newcastle Coastal Study 2003
· Our concerns with the Coastal Revitalisation Doc.
· The Plan of Management 2007
· The Expressions of Interest Doc 2008
· The failure of the proponent to meet the spirit of the documents and the need to integrate any development into the King Edward Park of which the Headland Reserve is an inholding.

The Parks and Playgrounds Movement submits this letter as a statement of objection and we reserve the right to forward a detailed submission early next week when members have had more time to attend the Council Administration Centre to see the documents We are disappointed that they are not easily accessible.

Yours sincerely

Doug Lithgow
President Parks and Playgrounds Movement.

Attention Wesley Wilson Senior Development Officer:
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc hereby submit this 7 page submission in the public interest and without any pecuniary interest whatsoever.

King Edward Headland Reserve – Mar 2010 showing former Club Buildings

King Edward Headland Plan of Management - Concept Plan (Aug 2007)

King Edward Headland Reserve: Ugly club buildings removed (Oct 2010)

King Edward Headland Reserve No R.1011189 Plan of Management - Concept Plan (Aug 2007)

Proposed Function Centre wrongly located to dominate reserve and coastal scenery
– Southern Elevation.

King Edward Park – Former Bowling Club Building dominating the Park – 2005.

King Edward Park including the Headland Reserve dedicated for Public Recreation.Parish Map 1916 Note Watt Street Park Entrance, Park Drive and Bowling Green.

 Entrance Gates to King Edward Park donated by Joseph Wood to mark 50 years in Newcastle. Officially opened 1907. Note entrance and location of the Park Drive on Parish Map above.

Important public walkway and promenade linking and integrating the Headland Reserve and the King Edward Park and Fletcher Park. Formal concept featured in Plan of Management. 

General Layout contrary to PoM provides no pedestrian promenade vantage points

Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc. believes that the principle matter that is required to be considered in the assessment of development application DA 10/1735 is that the layout proposed is contrary to the intention of the Plan of Management for King Edward Headland Reserve No.1011189. The PoM is dated August 2007 and the concept plan summing up the provisions of the plan is located at the end of the Plan of Management document.

Subsection 114 (2) of the Crown Lands Act states.

(2) If a plan of management is adopted:
(a) the reserve trust shall carry out and give effect to it, and
(b) no operations may be undertaken on or in relation to the reserve unless they are in accordance
with the plan.

Council Council’s attention is drawn to the fact that Reserve 1011189 for public recreation is controlled by an adopted plan of Management and that the PoM is relevant to the provisions of the Newcastle Council LEP 2003 and the Draft LEP should be considered. The diagram in the Expressions of Interest reiterates the principles underlying the Plan of Management concept plan.

Heritage of the Park and the convict mining History.

The function centre as proposed is principally a private commercial venture sited in a position contrary to the PoM that denies the public the right to its headland reserve and public vantage points.

The development proposal does not relate to the development to the cultural needs of the Newcastle community or address the interpretation of the unique military and convict colonial mining heritage of the site. Special acknowledgement should be made in the development to the Aboriginal cultural heritage of the location known to the aboriginal people as Yi-ran- na- li.

The earlier park entrance with its ornamental gates donated to the Newcastle Borough Council by Joseph Wood and the alignment of the carriageway should also be reflected in the layout.

Furthermore the location of the original Bowling Green and Club House as shown on the part of the 1916 Parish Map enclosed should be integrated in the design.

Failure to address these significant principles together with a layout that does not truly develop the headland reserve as a place of public recreation with public vantage points is sufficient reason to reject the current design. Council is also reminded that the Headland Reserve is within Newcastle ’s premier Public Park originally dedicated and notified in the Government Gazette July 16 1863 folio 1545 on the request of the Municipal Corporation of Newcastle conveyed to the NSW Legislative Assembly by Mr Hannell MLA Newcastle’s first Mayor.

The importance of this significant site and of the requirement to conserve the natural advantages and character of the land for the enjoyment of the general public cannot be overstated. The current proposal would permanently alienate the reserve the coastal scenery and deny the general public full
access to their reserve.

The former Bowling Club Lease was revoked because of the corrupt operation that had been allowed to develop and because the Club had not been operating within its lease conditions. It was in conflict with the reserve dedication, the local community and the Department of Lands.

We believe that Council and Trust Managers are obliged to follow the sound concepts of the Plan of Management in accordance with the Crown Lands Act 1989.

The Newcastle City Bowling Club had occupied and enjoyed a privileged position in the park but there has not been a Bowling Cub for many years and the derelict buildings were allowed to dominate the King Edward Park for far to long. We object to the erection of new buildings contrary to the Concept Plan that would dominate the King Edward Park to an even greater extent than the former dilapidated buildings.

Parks and Playgrounds Movement is pleased to submit supplementary information and illustrations to further explain our objections by reference to the points made in our principal objection submitted by Email on the 3rd of February 2011 and kindly acknowledged by Senior Development Officer Wesley Wilson 8/2/2011.

The Movement thanks the Newcastle City Council for the opportunity to comment on the Development Application 10/1735 for the dedicated King Edward Headland Reserve.

Yours sincerely

Doug Lithgow
Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.

The Closure of David Jones

The closure of the David Jones store in the Citycentre of Newcastle this weekend is further evidence that Newcastle's Revitalisation strategy may be wrong.‏

The letter enclosed was published in the Newcastle Herald recently and answered by Councillor Buman but he missed the point that David Jones had been trading in the area for more than 50 years and GPT was never more than a vision.

Please look at the enclosed Herald cutting from 1988 establishing the Citycentre and the Local Rate.

The City has been aggressively hammering the same rail target for more than twenty years.

Yet City Rail has been bringing the same number of passengers to the city with a modest increase every year at no cost whatsoever to the city ratepayers.

The visions of rail removal are just visions unless there is an economically viable replacement.

The citycentre local rate mentioned in the article has been collected for revitalisation probably to the tune of many millions of dollars with little effect.

By 1992 $399.000 plus was being collected annually.

Is there something wrong with our revitalisation strategy? The loss of David Jones may be evidence of that.

I ask each and every Councillor to examine: are funds being collected by the CBD Local Rate and how are they being expended?


Letters Editor
Newcastle Herald
Newcastle

Friday, 28 January 2011

Dear Editor,

RE: The closure of the David Jones store in the Citycentre.

The closure of the David Jones store in the Citycentre of Newcastle is evidence that Newcastle’s Revitalisation strategy lost its way.

Newcastle has been revitalising in earnest for twenty years now. The news report of June 1988 summarised the revitalisation vision that Honeysuckle embraced in their approved scheme four years later.

“Newcastle’s central business district (CBD) was renamed Citycentre and aggressively promoted, with money raised by way of a local rate.  High-rise apartments a privately funded Technical College with fee-paying students from overseas and federal offices were among the high priority proposals aimed at getting the City back on its feet”. An extra department store was to be established but now there is to be none.

It seems that far too much hope and money has been expended on pursuing ponzi visions of railway removal rather than sound incremental commercial development.

Ratepayers may ask has the money collected from the local rate for revitalisation been wisely spent.

Doug Lithgow

Bogey Hole

The Honourable Jodi McKay MP

Minister for Tourism
Minister for the Hunter
PO Box 1816, NEWCASTLE NSW 2300

Dear Jodi,

You asked me to have a look at the LPMA proposal and comment re the Bogey Hole. I am sorry that I have only been able to get back to you at this time.

It is all a bit over the top as I said and unnecessary but thanks for arranging for me to see the proposal.

What is really needed is the repair of the stairway and renewal of the hand rails. This old photo shows the stairs when they were new and they just need renewal now. Note the handrail at the old dressing shed or cubicle level. That hand rail needs to be reinstated with access to the rock platform.

Regular maintenance is needed in such proximity to the ocean. The platform proposed is likely to be more dangerous that no platform.

The ocean side safety chain of course should have been replaced when the Council broke it.

You may have noted that all of Newcastle’s safety fences need renewal: Shepherds Hill the Obelisk etc. Thank goodness the fence above the bogey Hole has been repaired now.

Doug Lithgow
President, Parks and Playgrounds Movement Inc.