FACT V. SPIN
ST JOHNS CONTEXT ISSUES SUSTAINABLE SYDNEY ST JOHNS SITE ISSUES


THE CHURCH DOESN’T ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH

1. SPIN: The development complies with guidelines
FACT: This proposal grossly exceeds Council’s controls

  • Trafalgar Properties want to build two 6-storey buildings each to the maximum envelope of 18 metres (or about 60 feet). The church roof is 40 feet high (about 13 metres). This is 3-Storys higher than the church roof.
  • The FSR exceeds guidelines by 70%

2. SPIN: More Open Space
FACT: There is Less Open Space

  • How can 9,927 square metre residential and commercial development offer more open space? The development will close the last open space corridor.
  • There is no change to what is already offered on the site – the walk through corridor is simply being swapped from the south side of the church to the north.
  • Tower 1 (north) is actually at least 1-storey below the church grounds. This means pedestrian access must be negotiated up and down a steep gradient of steps
  • Commercial advertising will further intrude and instruct pedestrian enjoyment and access

3. SPIN: The development will be ‘church mews style’ and harmonise with the church group and area
FACT: Over-development

  • The development does not consider the heritage significance of the area as a whole. It does not consider its careful balance of building scale and vistas to historic landmark sites such as the St Johns Church Group.
    Major professional groups such as the Art Deco Society are crying out about the need to strengthen heritage conservation controls.

4. SPIN: Hasn’t this DA been approved by the Heritage Office?
FACT: NO! This is a council planning matter, not a matter for the Heritage Office

  • It is not part of the Charter of the Heritage Office to address broad area planning. The developer isn’t demolishing the church and rectory. But they are crowding them out and destroying the “contemplative space” essential to the meaning of Blacket’s gothic revival architecture. These controls are determined by City Council.

5. SPIN: The community was consulted
FACT: NO!

  • Instead of consultation we’ve had PROPAGANDA from Hawker BRITTON.
  • ‘Propaganda’ is "an organized programme of publicity and selected information ". Hawker BRITTON ‘consulted’ with 48 people in groups of 8! Meanwhile 100s of letters have been sent and petitions of 100s of signatures collected.

6. SPIN: Doesn’t the church need money for the homeless?
FACT: The church is crying poor. But their argument doesn’t stack up.

  • The Anglican church claims that it needs the developments to raise money to continue their good work with the homeless and indigent. But nobody in their right mind believes that a brand new spanking block of 90 units will tolerate the poor hanging about as a design accessory.
  • We have the examples of the St Margarets Hospital site, Finger Wharf and The Horizon which have all actively displaced the poor. When luxury units and shopping malls go in there is no place for the poor and dispossed.
    This is not even a good deal for the church. A 99-year lease to Trafalgar Properties – is a contract binding 4 generations. The church gets the income from the rent of one commercial floor.
    And yet the Church says local residents are anti-homeless! If there is a problem lets work on it together.
    HOUSE THE HOMELESS, NOT THE RICH!

7. SPIN: Doesn’t the church have the right to develop?
FACT: this is gifted land for church use and no other and for 150 years the church has enjoyed tax exemption.

  • The church is entitled to an income from reasonable and appropriate developments. But like any other developer it must be responsible for its heritage and context.
  • We must also bear in mind that as gifted land, for 150 years the church has enjoyed tax exemption. Significant social capital is already invested in this community land.
  • RICH CHURCH -POOR COMMUNITY


8. SPIN: The church needs $1 million over the next 10 years to undertake its heritage responsibilities
FACT: Public monies are available for this purpose

  • The Heritage Council has paid $750,000 for the Spire, $100,000 for the organ and $50,000 for the Rectory. Funds of $30 million are available for buildings on the National Register.
 
Back Next