|
News and Events
|
The Abbey
public meetings
Second resolution on The Abbey redevelopment
At a meeting convened by the Society on 3 June, 2004, the following motion was passed concerning the proposed redevelopment of The Abbey site:
This meeting of Glebe residents supports the amendments made to the original proposal [DA No D/03/01430 for 156-60 Bridge Road, Glebe, The Abbey site] which achieve restoration of Reussdale and a more sympathetic treatment of The Abbey itself. However, it is the view of the meeting that the total proposal still constitutes an over-development of the site, and the floor space ratio should be brought back [from the current 1.1: 1] to [the standard set in Town Plan 2000 for residential sites in Glebe of] 0.7:1.
The retention of Hamilton [an Item of Environmental Heritage listed in Town Plan 2000 and also on the Register of the National Estate] is also agreed to be a desirable outcome. Furthermore, the meeting confirmed that many issues raised in the resolution of the Public Meeting of 4 February, 2004, have not been sufficiently addressed and should be resolved prior to the application being considered by Council:
There is insufficient setback to allow access for emergency vehicles, especially on the corner of Reuss Street and Hewitt Avenue. There is insufficient setback in Reuss Street generally. No direct access from the site to Reuss Street should be permitted. Without a further reduction in the building between The Abbey and The Hermitage, the impact on The Hermitage is still too severe. Also, Council should ensure that in assessing future DAs for the professional offices the parking needs of the residential component are not compromised, and the impact on surrounding streets is considered.
Further it was noted that, because of delays caused by amalgamation, no review of the City Council's planning controls had taken place, including the Development Control Plan for this site, DCP 49, and hence the inadequacies of that document, especially as regards the impact on adjacent and surrounding areas, had not been rectified. This should be taken into account when the proposal is assessed.
Postscripts 1. The Management Committee, at its meeting on 9 June, resolved to write to all City of Sydney Councillors asking them to hold a site inspection so they would better understand the site.
2. Councillor Verity Firth, who was present at the Benledi meeting, tells us that she asked a Question Without Notice at the 7 June Council meeting about the viability of the Council purchasing the Abbey site. The question was: "At the community meeting held by the Glebe Society last Thursday night to discuss the development application for The Abbey site in Bridge Road, a number of community members raised the issue of the Council purchasing this valuable heritage site and thus being in the position to protect and preserve all three heritage buildings, Reussdale, The Abbey and the historic Hamilton, from demolition. Will the Lord Mayor consider the option of Council purchasing this site?"'
The Lord Mayor replied that Council would 'consider the option' of purchasing the site.
First resolution on The Abbey redevelopment
The following is the text of the
resolution passed at a meeting held at Benledi on 4 February to
discuss development plans for The Abbey site.
All heritage buildings on the site are of major significance and should be preserved and restored.
The demolition of Hamilton,
and the insertion of 14 units into the church, reduce and damage
the heritage value of the site.
The proposed 25 new townhouses are too numerous, tall and bulky,
and represent a very substantial overdevelopment of the site.
The upper limit of 0.7:1 FSR, including all heritage buildings,
is the maximum density that should be permitted. The impact of
these townhouses on The Hermitage, 154 Bridge Road, an adjacent
heritage building, is severe.
Townhouses along the Reuss Street frontage ignore the
established building line.
The mature trees are a landmark contribution to the site and the
streetscape, and should be retained unless they are a weed
species.
Provision for parking, and ingress and egress from the site, are
unsatisfactory. Access for emergency vehicles is inadequate.
This proposal departs substantially from the controls of LEP and
DCP 2000 and DCP 49. The desire of the Glebe community is that
the full heritage significance of the site be retained and
conserved with the minimum of new development.
If and when the consent authorities receive amendments to this
application, this meeting requests they be advertised for
comment for the same period as the original application.
This meeting also requests The Glebe Society Inc to hold a
further public meeting to discuss the application in a larger
venue.
Pending the receipt of such amendments, this meeting requests
the City of Sydney to expedite its review of DCP 49 in the light
of the points raised in this resolution, including a further
period of advertising for public comment.
Moved Neil Macindoe
The meeting approved the motion without dissent (unanimous).
|
 |
|