Barangaroo was a Cammeragal from the North Shore. She was among the women who tried to lure white men ashore in November 1788 so the warriors could attack them.
Big iconic developments in Sydney are always the stuff of controversy, and the [multi-billion] dollar ‘Barangaroo’ development on the North-western side of the city is no exception. Paul Keating has been working on the master plan for seven years as chairman of the Bangaroo Design Panel and in his opinion, “This is easily the grandest, most important waterfront development in the world.”
Lucky Lend Lease gets exclusive development rights for $6 billion worth of property and in return the people of NSW get a large harbourside public park. The construction period is 10 years. It is currently under the SHFA but will be established as an authority in its own right.
(None of which is yet final, By the way. However the Heads of Agreement has been drawn up between Lend lease and the government and contracts have been signed.)
Mr Keating’s enthusiasm is not shared by some other architects. Take the ones who did not get the contract – Philip Thalis told Architecture & Design Magazine that his team had been told to stop working on it. (They were the 2006 competition winners.)
“Exasperated Australian architects now have to watch British architect Richard Rogers take over the plan that will determine the future of one Sydney’s most important headland developments.” complained the magazine in its quaintly protectionist way.
British architect Lord Richard Rogers (solo after a long design partnership with Renzo Piano, possibly world #1) plans an aggressive development of towers with entirely green credentials. The Powerhouse Museum recently said on its blog “involvement of international design eminence Richard Rogers suggests that Barangaroo will boast design spectacle rather than daggy but vibrant urbanity.” (referring to Darling Harbour)
Lord Rogers is thinking about a 200 m tower to be placed on a pier that projects into the harbour 150 m (3 olympic pools length). The cry goes up that it is the beginning of the end and will set a precedent for further dastardly reclamation of the harbour and foreshore (which apparently belongs to everyone). It is wrongly claimed to be a significant obstruction across the gap to Darling Island. Owners of expensive apartments to the south of the proposed tower hotel are bemoaning their potential loss of sunlight in the morning. A perceived lack of transparency in making the decision is considered an issue…
Moving across the water to Pyrmont it has to be said there is a strong in-your-face quality about the development and there is strong local opposition to the current design. And residents on Louisa Road Birchgrove are complaining about the tower blocking their existing stunning view of the city, although it is a little hard to feel sympathy with them.
The Sydney Morning Herald has weighed in with an absurdly poor graphic of what looks like a photocopy of a carpenter’s pencil sellotaped onto a printout from Google Earth. The National Trust also appears to have panicked and its wits have flown as a result of reading the SMH, judging by their web page.
Paul Keating in an interview on Stateline said “ … why would the Herald go and use some digital company in Sydney to try and do something when they’ve got this material [that's] available from the Government? I’ll tell you why: because the paper’s coverage of this is intellectually corrupt. Truly, deeply intellectually corrupt. The Sydney Morning Herald’s coverage of this has been disgraceful.”
A closer examination of the Barangaroo Development Authority’s maps and videos shows about half the site landscaped public ‘natural’ foreshore open space, right around to Walsh Bay, but there is very high density development in the Southern end of the site between the Roger’s tower and the top of Darling Harbour. The city’s existing skyline buildings will still appear highest from Balmain.
This is prime real estate. It is seen by supporters and developers as a chance to improve the city and for the people, providing a huge headland park right smack in the middle of it. On the tram line!
There has been some dissent within the Sydney Council. Clover Moore has been supportive but the Greens councillor Chris Harris is dead against it. In this 280210 media release he said “It seems to me that mother nature created a beautiful canvas when she shaped Sydney harbour.”
Fine words but in fact the site is entirely reclaimed land according to the NSW Geological Survey, which says it is composed of man-made fill consisting of “dredged estuarine sand and mud, demolition rubble, industrial and household waste”. Not to mention the AGL Producer Gas Plant that was there for almost a century, with remedial costs unknown at the moment.
Cr Harris goes on to talk about ‘Future Premiers in cahoots with their political mates’ and ‘privatisation of the harbour’. So, lets not go there, but instead reflect if any of this dissent will translate into changes to the proposal? Probably not – depends on many factors – this game has many players and huge financial extents, and is well advanced.
Finally, another ingredient in this dense inner harbour pot-pourri is the cruise ship terminal. According to Independent Councillor John Stamolis, a Leichhardt councillor for the Balmain area, the 2006 Barangaroo design retained the cruise terminal, but the government now plans to move it to White Bay. Cr Stamolis is opposed to this (because of perceived loss of amenity to people on that side of the peninsular) and wants the council to write a letter to the Planning Minister, the Lord Mayor of Sydney, and the CEO of the Barangaroo Development Authority, explaining how the LMC don’t like it. But who will care?
