Blue Mountains City Council Meeting: 24 April 2007 Item no: 8 Subject: Springwood Town Centre Project: File No: F00241 Source: Council Meeting- Business Paper (PDF 6.2 MB)
See: Minutes
Councillor Pippa McInnes voted against this; the other 11 Councillors voted for it.
This report arises from the process set in place at Council's Ordinary Meeting of 30 January 2007 (Minute No. 18), regarding the use and development of Council land to assist in the further development of the Springwood Town Centre.
This report has two goals:
At its meeting of 30 January 2007, the Council considered the possibility of using Council land as a catalyst to assist the further development of Springwood Town Centre. The land under consideration comprises three key sites within the Springwood Town Centre, identified as the "Southern car park", "Northern car park" and "Civic Centre site". The location of these sites is shown on Attachment 1.
Three options were considered in order to progress redevelopment of one or more of these sites:
Councillors resolved:
(Minute No. 18, 30/01/07)
Accordingly, limited research and consultation has been undertaken and is reported herein. It is considered that further consultation and research, in the way of social and community impacts of the project is required before progressing to the formulation of Expression of Interest documentation.
The following tasks have been completed for the project:
A range of studies, plans, and files were reviewed in order to scope relevant work undertaken previously by the Council. This included a review of work undertaken in accordance with the Springwood Town Centre Masterplan (Coneybeare Morrison & Partners, 1995), and a review of the work undertaken by the Council on development of these sites in 2004-2005.
Council has engaged consultants to complete a traffic study and an economic market review.
GHD were engaged to review the traffic studies previously undertaken for Springwood Town Centre and provide an update on the opportunities and constraints facing usage of the three sites. Implications for residential, commercial and retail development options for the three sites were detailed. GHD have provided advice based on the capacity of the three sites and the surrounding road network.
It was found that Springwood town centre generally enjoys a high level of accessibility with good strategic road links and good access to public transport. However, the Macquarie Road / Hawkesbury Road intersection experiences congestion during peak periods and there are no dedicated cycle routes.
Key constraints include the Macquarie Road / Hawkesbury Road intersection, parking availability during peak periods, accommodating additional truck movements for servicing new development and the need to accommodate parking during construction on the sites.
Key opportunities include the potential to provide new land uses that compliment existing uses, thereby encouraging multi-purpose trips and minimising additional traffic impacts. There is also potential for shared usage of parking between land uses with different peak times. Opportunities also arise from potential developer contributions towards parking and intersection improvements and the potential to enhance pedestrian and cycle environments. Opportunities and constraints were also identified for each of the three sites.
Key issues associated with redevelopment options include:
GHD also conducted an initial assessment of the feasibility of constructing the David Road East link road, currently a closed road. It was the view of GHD that the road would provide limited benefit for traffic movements to and from the town centre.
Hill PDA were engaged to review relevant economic studies previously undertaken for the Springwood Town Centre and provide up to date advice, focused on the potential uses of the three sites. The constraints and opportunities facing the town centre were discussed and the capacity for increased retail floor space within the primary trade area was identified.
It was found that other retail centres in the surrounding area, steep topography, traffic movement, the Railway and Highway corridor, and the prevalence of few recognised national chains within the town centre, all impact negatively on the town centre's potential for development. However, key opportunities are presented by the ability to improve streetscape and landscaping works along Macquarie Road and the Rail corridor, to establish a town centre "gateway" at the Hawkesbury Road roundabout, and to encourage appropriate medium density residential development within the town centre. An expenditure analysis identified that there may be potential for the centre to accommodate a national chain supermarket, in addition to the three supermarkets existing in the area (IGAs within the town centre and Coles at Winmalee).
The following redevelopment options were identified for the three sites:
Option 1: Retention of Braemar House and refurbishment of the Civic Centre. At the northern car park, a mixed use development including specialty retail, commercial office, residential units and car parking. At the southern car park, specialty retail stores, a national chain supermarket, commercial offices and parking.
Option 2: Retention of Braemar House and refurbishment of the Civic Centre. At the northern car park, a national chain supermarket with specialty retail and commercial office and car parking. At the southern car park, a mixed use development with specialty retail, commercial office, residential units and car parking.
Option 3: Retention of Braemar House and redevelopment of the Civic Centre as medium density residential apartments and parking. At the northern car park, accommodation of all uses currently at the Civic Centre site, including library, neighbourhood and community centres, and Council offices, with parking. At the southern car park, specialty retail stores, a national chain supermarket, commercial offices and parking.
It is noted that the market may identify options other than those recommended by Hill PDA.
Both Hill PDA and GHD completed the first stage of their studies with a presentation to the Springwood Town Centre Stakeholder Workshop (discussed below) on 29 March 2007. Stage Two of each consultancy will commence when a preferred development option for one or more of the three sites is identified. In Stage Two, consultants will identify the feasibility of development options with reference to economic and traffic constraints identified in Stage One. This advice will provide detailed input to the Expression of Interest documentation provided for the project.
Council has conducted a review of relevant constraints and opportunities facing the three sites and compiled this within an Information Pack. A review of land classification for the three sites was undertaken, and the status of Council community and operational land on the sites is now confirmed. Planning and heritage constraints were also canvassed. In addition, the current tenure arrangements across the three sites have been summarily reviewed.
The Council has commenced planning for probity issues associated with the project. A probity plan is currently being prepared by an independent consultant.
Councillors have recently received a Briefing on probity issues and advice that there should be additional community consultation as well as an extended timeframe for the project to achieve all outcomes, including that consultation. It is suggested that the content and timing of this consultation be discussed by the Finance and Assets Working Party and is reflected in Recommendation 3.
In the report to the Council of 30 January 2007, it was noted that community consultation would be important to this process, in order to gather valuable community knowledge and inform the community about possible intentions for the Council EoI process. It was also noted that the timeframe adopted under Option 2 limits options for consultation.
A workshop with invited community representatives was recommended, to be conducted by an independent facilitator. It was noted that a later development application would allow for community consultation, technical investigation and reporting.
The workshop was held on Thursday 29 March at the Springwood Community Club. It allowed a wide range of community representatives and stakeholders with an interest in the sites to gather, be briefed on the project, and exchange opinions, suggestions and ideas.
A total of 55 people were invited to the stakeholder workshop. This comprised representatives of:
Invitations were also extended to those who made enquiries upon hearing about the workshop. All who asked to attend were accepted. A total of 50 people attended the workshop, representing a broad cross-section of community and government stakeholders.
The workshop was held from 10:00 am to 3:30 pm, at the Springwood and District Community Club. Julian Crawford of EcoSTEPS P/L provided independent facilitation for the workshop.
The morning comprised a series of presentations delivering background information about the three sites and potential development options. Expert economic advice was received from Hill PDA, with GHD providing expert advice on traffic and transport issues. Council staff provided a background to the project, an overview of planning and heritage controls, and a summary of existing community uses of the sites.
An opportunity for individual reflection and comment was provided at the end of the morning sessions, however the main period for community comment was given in the afternoon sessions. The first feedback session grouped comments in the following key themes:
Attendees gathered around the key issues according to their interest, and discussed these in groups following the morning session. The second feedback session grouped comments in relation to one of the three key sites. Attendees gathered in groups to discuss the comments, according to their interest.
Attendees were given the opportunity to provide input to discussions on all themes and sites.
A copy of the EcoSTEPS report, summarising the outcomes of the workshop, is provided as Attachment 2. A copy of the report has also been sent to all stakeholders who indicated at the workshop that they would like to receive the report. The report contains a record of all comments made at the workshop, and also provides comments of the discussion groups along the key themes and sites.
It is considered on a preliminary level that the Stakeholder Workshop was a success. The Council was able to gather specific input from targeted stakeholders within the community, and the responses provided will assist in shaping the framework for development on the three sites. The workshop provided an opportunity for key stakeholders to exchange ideas and influence the outcomes of this project.
It has been clearly stated to attendees that the workshop was about capturing a diversity of responses, not about classifying or prioritising issues. A wide diversity of opinion was obtained on the day. No summary can adequately capture the diversity of responses, and it is recommended that the attached report be examined for a better understanding of the input gained. However, for ease of understanding, a number of central points can be derived from comments made:
Themes which attracted the greatest number of comments were:
Key points arising from discussion under the "community" theme are separately expressed at (4) and (5) below. Points arising from discussion of "planning" matters included the retention of community facilities and a village atmosphere, concern that tourism has been forgotten, and considerations relating to heritage, density, and the impact of building height on views. Points arising under discussion of the "economic" theme, in addition to that expressed at (3) below, included increasing office and residential space and carefully planning retail space.
A large number of comments (50 per cent of those for a specific site and more from the post-workshop evaluation form) related to the Civic Centre site. Issues surrounding the current and future use of this site, potential redevelopment outcomes, potential refurbishment, potential relocation and disruption of services prompted both concern and anticipation among attendees at the workshop. It is clear that any redevelopment or refurbishment options for facilities on the Civic Centre site will affect a large number of people. Development options and any permanent or temporary relocation of services will need to be carefully managed.
Significant opinion was expressed against having a third supermarket in the town centre, expressed in comments under "economic" comments in the post-workshop feedback forms and comments taken from the floor. Balancing this was a significant concern that action should be taken to enhance further economic development within Springwood.
It was identified that the project has complex interactions with existing community uses, particularly at the Civic Centre site. In addition, the project potentially proposes some redevelopment or refurbishment of key community sites and provides additional facilities, whether commercial, residential or retail. Those at the Stakeholder Workshop considered that the social impact of such development had been overlooked by the project so far, and that an analysis of social impacts is required. This point emerged from discussions under the "community" theme, and was strongly stated from verbal comments taken from the floor. It forms the basis for Recommendation 4 made by this Report.
Preference for an open community consultation process was strongly expressed by those present. It was considered that the workshop in itself was not enough in the way of public consultation and the wider community should be consulted. Many comments also stated that the Council should take time and not rush this process. These points emerged from discussions under the "community" theme, from comments in the post-workshop evaluation form and also from verbal comments taken from the floor.
While it is considered that those present are key actors within the Springwood community, it is acknowledged that they do not represent the concerns and views of the wider population. It is considered that an open consultation process would be of great benefit to the project and would assist in balancing the comments received from key stakeholders, placing these in the context of the views of the wider population. This forms the basis for Recommendation 3 made by this Report. Further analysis of the extent of community consultation for the project should be undertaken in accordance with Council's Community Consultation Policy, adopted in December 2004.
Councillors have received a separate briefing on probity which incorporated the need to undertake additional community consultation. This message has also been communicated through the Stakeholder workshop. The issue of probity in relation to dealings with public land and finances have been highlighted and are further addressed below in relation to Public Private Partnerships and the requirements of the Department of Local Government.
The Council resolved to allocate $50,000 to undertake the Springwood Project. The allocation for this project has been fully expended upon: traffic, economic impact, additional town planning staff, preliminary probity and preliminary Expression of Interest advice and the conduct of the Stakeholders Workshop and associated report.
Firm quotes for the remainder of the project are being obtained however, it is anticipated that additional funding of at least $110,000 will be required to progress the Probity, Expression of Interest and additional community consultation phases of the project.
It is appropriate to reflect both the revised budget and time requirements of the project in the Draft 2007/08 Budget and Management Plan.
The Department of Local Government has been contacted in relation to the above legislation and guidelines. Preliminary advice suggests that the Springwood project does fall within criteria of this legislation and guidelines.
The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that councils follow established practices when dealing with community assets and finances. Section 1.2 of the dlg Circular 05/51 states "Council Responsibilities - Councils have a responsibility to their communities for the prudent management of assets and finances. Indeed, local government has responsibilities that may go beyond the responsibilities of a private sector partner or project proponent"
Officers from the Department of Local Government have confirmed that the Council should submit a preliminary assessment when it has been established what form any Expression of Interest/ Tender is to take. Subject to the Department's preliminary review a formal assessment may be required to be lodged for consideration by the Department's Project Review Committee.
The dlg Circular 05/51 requires the General Manager to certify that the assessment has been prepared in accordance with the Guidelines. This certification is required to be supported by a Council resolution. This requirement is reflected in Recommendation 7.
It is envisaged that the preliminary assessment can be lodged at the same time that additional community consultation is conducted. In the event that a subsequent formal submission is required it is likely that there will be an impact upon the overall project timeframe.
The project has progressed through the initial information-gathering stages, and the information amassed to date has been helpful in assessing the potential impact of development options.
Initial consultation undertaken for the project has been a success. However, the need for further community consultation has been clearly identified at the Stakeholder Workshop, as discussed above. It is strongly recommended that the Council undertake further community consultation to narrow the scope of development options and determine their acceptability to the wider community. The scale and timing of such consultation should be discussed at the Finance and Assets Working Party.
While studies of traffic and economic impacts of development have been commissioned, it is recognised that no assessment of social impacts has been undertaken. The project is likely to have significant implications for the Springwood community. It is recommended that a community and social analysis of Springwood be prepared, to assist in the identification of development options for the three sites. This additional work is recommended because the three sites contain a number of significant community uses and the implications of their potential relocation or replacement need to be clearly understood prior to the drafting of the EoI documentation.
Should the Council support the undertaking of additional community consultation and a social impact assessment, there will be immediate impacts on the resources and timeframe adopted for the project. Current completion is set for December 2007. With this additional work, the completion of the project is likely to occur around April 2008. In addition, the existing committed resources would be insufficient to complete these tasks. It is recommended that a revised timetable and revised resource plan for the project be discussed at the Finance and Assets Working Party and necessary additional funding and staff resources be reflected in the 2006/07 and Draft 2007/08 Budget and Management Plan.
Once sufficient community and Councillor input is gathered, Council will be required to narrow down development, and more clearly define options for the three sites, undertake relevant dlg procedures and proceed to formulation of an EoI documentation.
Click for larger image:
by independent facilitator, Julian Crawford of EcoSTEPS
See: Report of stakeholder workshop