Report - Development Negotiation and Engagement Case Studies: Central Park and Barangaroo, Sydney, Australia

6

Development Negotiation 15145

Assignment 3: Development Negotiation Case Studies

Case Studies: Central Park and Barangaroo

Student Name: Christopher Croucamp
Student Number: 11594759

INTRODUCTION:

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the issues and challenges that have influenced the negotiation and engagement processes of two major urban renewal developments currently under construction in Sydney; namely Barangaroo and Central Park. The paper concludes by providing recommendations as to how the negotiation and engagement process in Barangaroo could have been improved in order to achieve a more equitable, ethical and sustainable outcome for all stakeholders involved.

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECTS:

Barangaroo:

Barangaroo is located on a 22-hectare site of the eastern foreshore of Darling Harbour. The site was originally a shipping and stevedoring facility however in 2003 the NSW Government acquired the land with the intention of redeveloping it into a commercial precinct. In 2005 an international design competition was conducted for the redevelopment of the site however due to a number of factors the design fell through (Reinmuth, 2012). Nevertheless in 2007 the NSW Government approved the first concept plan for Barangaroo (Barangaroo Delivery Authority, 2014). In order to fast track the redevelopment of the site the NSW Government established the Barangaroo Delivery Authority Act 2009 and introduced the Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA), which opted for awarding the tender of the site to Lend Lease (Reinmuth, 2012). Since then the BDA's role has been to manage and oversee the foreshore redevelopment at Barangaroo in coordination with the other major stakeholders, most notably, the developers Lend Lease (BDA, 2014). The enormous $6 billion site is divided into three areas: Barangaroo South, Central Barangaroo and Headland Park (See Figure 1 and 2) (BDA, 2014). Barangaroo South, already under construction by Lend Lease, is to be comprised of several major high-rise office buildings and apartments as well as a contentious recently added casino and hotel funded by James Packer. The original concept plan for the site is now hardly recognisable with numerous amendments resulting in considerable increases in floor space (from 350,000 sqm in 2005 to over 780,000 sqm currently) and additional height to the buildings (BDA, 2014). By completion in the mid 2020s Barangaroo is expected to house 3,500 people and be a place of work for 24,000 people (BDA, 2014).

Figure 1 – Master plan for the Barangaroo site (BDA, 2014)

Figure 2 – Artistic impression of the master plan for the Barangaroo site (BDA, 2014).



Central Park:

The Central Park redevelopment is located on the old Charlton & United Brewery site in the suburb of Chippendale, just south of the Sydney CBD (Frasers Property, 2013). The site occupies nearly six hectares of land and is a major mixed-use urban renewal project focused on the development of new apartments, offices, retail outlets and parks (See Figure 3) (Frasers Property, 2013). The NSW Minister for Planning approved the current modified concept plan for the site in early 2009 (Fraser's Property, 2013). Like Barangaroo the project is to be completed in stages and is already well underway with stages one and two already complete. By completion in the early 2020s, the $2 billion project will contain roughly 2200 residential apartments as well as an estimated 900 student dwellings (Frasers Property, 2013). Frasers Property owns and manages the property in partnership with Sekisui House (City of Sydney, 2014). Thus unlike Barangaroo there have been no accusations of a conflict of interest since the NSW Government does not own the land. The project is also considered to have employed far better environmental and design standards compared to Barangaroo given its independent nature and the superior engagement efforts of Frasers Property.














Figure 3 – Artistic impression of the master plan for the Central Park site.




IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS AND CHALLENGES IN THE NEGOTIATION AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS:

Barangaroo:

Given the sheer size of Barangaroo the project has involved a wide array of stakeholders to date, all of which possess varying levels of interest and influence over the project. Appendix 1 identifies all the stakeholders involved in the negotiation and engagement process of Barangaroo development as well as their issues, interests and influence over the project. The NSW Government and Department of Planning and Environment have been represented in the process by the BDA. The department has a role in assessing and determining development applications that are considered State Significant Development for Barangaroo (Department of Planning, 2014). The City of Sydney Council is the consent authority for development applications valued below $10 million (Department of Planning, 2014). Since the NSW Government classified all of Barangaroo as State Significant, local planning laws including the City of Sydney's Local Environment Plan and Development Control Plans have been superseded by State planning instruments. Various stakeholders including the City have therefore been concerned that the State, in partnership with Lend Lease, has been able to assess and approve their own development applications for Barangaroo without going through the proper planning assessment channels.

The existing arrangements have thus meant that there has been very little room for negotiation throughout the planning and development stages of Barangaroo. Most of the actual negotiation has taken place behind closed doors between the State and Lend Lease with limited public consultation. Consequently there have been few genuine challenges to the project. As such the entire negotiation and engagement process for Barangaroo has been shrouded in controversy from the very outset. Both the BDA and Lend Lease have been criticized for their lack of transparency throughout the process, inadequate attempts at community and stakeholder engagement as well as for ongoing changes to the original concept plan (Doutney, 2010). This has resulted in serious public distrust in the developers, the NSW Government and its planning system and left Sydneysiders feeling extremely concerned about many aspects of the project.

Unsurprisingly there has been strong opposition to the project on many fronts, particularly from neighbouring residents of Millers Point, who's primary concern, has been the immediate threat the development poses to their health and safety as well as the impact it will have on their property values (Barnes, 2011). Many within the wider Sydney community believe the harbour belongs to everyone and also fiercely oppose the seizure of public foreshore for private profit (Doutney, 2010). Other concerned stakeholders including a number of community-based organisations and the City of Sydney Council have also voiced opposition to the project. Whilst the City has supported the redevelopment of the site, they have lobbied the NSW Government about concerns regarding some aspects of the project (City of Sydney, 2014). Public dissatisfaction in Barangaroo is reflected in a petition carried in 2011 that received a massive 11,000 signatures expressing the concerns of NSW citizens regarding the process, consultation, design, and environmental impacts of the development (Barnes, 2011). Clover Moore MP, the Mayor of Sydney, tabled the petition in NSW Parliament (Barnes, 2011). All this said, most of the opposition to the project has largely been ignored by the State and Barangaroo South now resembles a massive construction site as Lend Lease continues with its developments.

Central Park:

The considerable size of Central Park has meant that it has also involved a number of stakeholders in its engagement and negotiation process. Appendix 2 identifies all the stakeholders involved in the negotiation and engagement process of the Central Park development. Similarly to Barangaroo, the NSW Government has been the approval body for Central Park's development applications. However in the case of Central Park, the City of Sydney and the local community of Chippendale have been able to have considerable more input into the overall design and outcomes of the project resulting in far less opposition for the project. Nonetheless some aspects of the redevelopment have continued to concern the local community, including the effect of extra residents on existing infrastructure (Hasham, 2013).

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEGOTIATION AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS AND OUTCOMES ACHIEVED:

Barangaroo:

Engagement process:

During the early planning stages of Barangaroo, the NSW Government and Lend Lease were keen to ensure the public and other stakeholders be made fully aware of the project without having the ability to influence any of its major outcomes. Through the concept plan they were quick to establish all aspects of the project considered non-negotiable including various essential works, land zoning and FSRs. As a result they have primarily adopted an informed approach to community engagement whereby they have sought to provide the public with balanced and objective information in order to assist them in understanding the project (UTS, 2014). The BDA and Lend Lease have employed various engagement techniques during the process including newsletters, a website, public exhibitions and tours of the site, all of which seek to simply inform the community about the project (Lend Lease, 2014).

In some instances, the BDA and Lend Lease have adopted a more consultative approach to community engagement. This included the 2010 series of public forums that took place in different areas across metropolitan Sydney. The forums enabled the BDA and Lend Lease to explain and present the concept plans for the site as well as gather feedback from the community (Barangaroo Consultation Report, 2011). These sessions have however been criticised as being a waste of time as all the BDA does is go through the motions of consultation so they can say there are no objections (Duxfield, 2010). Both the informed and consultative approaches to engagement fit on the lower scale of the IAP2 spectrum of community participation and suggest that the BDA and Lend Lease have not sought to involve or empower the community with regards to planning of Barangaroo, and thus so far, existing community engagement efforts have been unable to influence the project and its outcomes.

Negotiation process:

The negotiation process for Barangaroo has been accused of having a lack of transparency with other key stakeholders such as the local community left out of important discussions regarding the project. The negotiation process can therefore be described as distributive. That is, a hard-bargaining style of negotiation whereby if one considers distributing a fixed amount of value to the project, there is only so much to go around, and the proportion to be distributed is variable. As a result a win-lose scenario develops (UTS, 2014). In the case of Barangaroo it is clear that power is the level of authority a stakeholder has in the project (UTS, 2014). And with the BDA and Lend Lease having all the authority, they have essentially already won as development of the site is already well underway. The whole process can perhaps best be exemplified in a recent decision earlier this year to include a new pier and a $2 billion 60-storey hotel and casino to be operated by James Packer's Crown Resorts (Nicholls, 2014). The development assessment for the complex took only three months and was done without any community consultation, making it one of the fastest assessments of a casino applicant in history (Nicholls, 2014). The unashamed attempt of the NSW Government to push through a non-complying development that includes a private developer's seizure of harbour waters, with an almost culpable lack of disclosure and community consultation, has only added to public distrust and dissatisfaction towards the project (Nicholls, 2014).

Central Park:

Engagement Process:

Unlike Barangaroo, the developers of Central Park have sought to involve the community and other concerned stakeholders throughout the engagement and negotiation process. Since the release of the first concept plan in 2007, Frasers have been hosting community and information events with local residents and businesses as well as officials from the City of Sydney, the Department of Planning and Infrastructure and other key stakeholders involved in the project. As a result, the masterplan for Central Park was revised in response to community feedback, before once again being approved by the NSW Department of Planning and Environment in 2009 (Central Park, 2014). Since then Frasers Property and Sekisui House have continued their community engagement efforts, briefing the community and other stakeholders via information days, newsletters, Facebook, and consultation sessions. With regards to the IAP2 spectrum of community participation, the developers have adopted an involved approach to community engagement whereby they have sought to work directly with the local community throughout the process to ensure that their concerns are understood and considered (UTS, 2014).

Negotiation Process:

The process for Central Park represents a much more integrative or interest-based approach to negotiation theory. Throughout the process there was a focus on sharing and understanding the fundamental interests of each of the stakeholders. Greater emphasis was put on commonalities rather than differences resulting in far less opposition to the project (UTS, 2014). The negotiation process was thus far more transparent than Barangaroo. Committing to meeting the needs of all stakeholders involved has ultimately resulted in a win – win scenario and provided for more equitable, ethical and sustainable outcomes for all stakeholders involved in Central Park (UTS, 2014).




RECOMMENDATIONS TO BARANGAROO AS TO HOW TO MAXIMISE POSITIVE OUTCOMES FOR ALL INVOLVED:

Barangaroo has come to stand for all that is wrong with the planning system and the way our city is governed (Reinmuth, 2012). The Government continues to prioritise the business of consuming the city rather than making the city (with the involvement of its citizens) (Reinmuth, 2012). This raises serious questions about morals and ethics. An ethical dilemma exists for the NSW Government as their actions put the potential economic benefit of doing a deal in conflict with their social obligation to other involved parties and the broader community (Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2010).

In order to overcome the high levels of public distrust surrounding Barangaroo, the BDA and Lend Lease need to rebuild rapport with other important stakeholders including the City of Sydney and the local residents of Millers Point. Rather than solely focusing on financial profit, they should focus on a developing a shared purpose and vision, and seek to involve and collaborate with the community and other stakeholders when making future decisions about the design and planning of Barangaroo (UTS, 2014). The BDA and Lend Lease should seek to keep stakeholders informed and actively listen to their interests thus better balancing the competing needs of the State and the local community. Moving forward there should be no more increases in floor space in any of the proposed buildings. Furthermore as a gesture of goodwill, Crown and Lend Lease could move the controversial hotel further back on land within the original site boundaries (City of Sydney, 2014). Perhaps the most important is for the BDA and Lend Lease to clearly communicate the reasons behind their decisions, including whether and why stakeholder input influenced these decisions. This would possibly temper or avoid community future opposition to the project and allow for a more equitable, ethical and sustainable outcome for all stakeholders involved in the development of Barangaroo.










Appendices:

Appendix 1: Summary of stakeholders involved in the negotiation and engagement process of Barangaroo

Stakeholder:
Issues and Interests:
Level of Interest and/or Impact:
Level of Influence:
NSW Government/Dept. of Planning - Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA)
Reconnecting the CBD with Darling Harbour
Stimulation of the NSW economy
Creating a new centre of national and global business within Sydney
HIGH
HIGH
Lend Lease
Profitability of the project developments
HIGH
HIGH
Crown Resorts
Construction of hotel and casino complex
Profitability of the complex
HIGH
HIGH
City of Sydney Council
Stripping of local planning powers
Local economic impacts
Visual impacts
Lack of community engagement
Returning the foreshore to the public
Heritage concerns
Crime and safety concerns
Effects of shadowing from the development
HIGH
MEDIUM
Transport for NSW
Public transport provision
Construction of new ferry hub
HIGH
MEDIUM
Roads and Maritime Services (RMS)
Roads and harbour infrastructure
Construction of new ferry hub
Traffic concerns
HIGH
MEDIUM
Community groups e.g. Barangaroo Action Group
Visual impacts
Stripping of local planning powers
Lack of community engagement
Environmental concerns
Traffic concerns
Heritage concerns
Returning the foreshore to the public
HIGH
MEDIUM
Millers Point local residents
Impacts on property values
Noise and odour pollution from ongoing construction
Loss of sense of community
Crime and safety concerns
Visual impacts
Protection of unique identity
Traffic concerns
Effects of shadowing from the development
HIGH
LOW
Neighbouring businesses
Local economic impacts
Traffic concerns
Crime and safety concerns
HIGH
LOW
General Sydney community
Visual impacts
Traffic concerns
Environmental concerns
Heritage concerns
MEDIUM
LOW


Appendix 2: Summary of stakeholders involved in the negotiation and engagement process of Central Park

Stakeholder:
Issues and Interests:
Level of Interest and/or Impact:
Level of Influence:
NSW Government/ Dept. of Planning
Stimulation of the NSW economy

HIGH
HIGH
Frasers Property and Sekisui House
Profitability of the project developments
Design excellence and sustainability
HIGH
HIGH
City of Sydney Council
Renewal of Chippendale area
Visual impacts
Heritage concerns
Housing affordability
Local economic impacts
HIGH
MEDIUM
Chippendale local residents
Noise and odour pollution from ongoing construction
Loss of sense of community
Housing affordability
Crime and safety concerns
Visual impacts Heritage concerns
Traffic concerns
Effects of shadowing from the development
HIGH
MEDIUM
Neighbouring businesses
Local economic impacts
Traffic concerns
Crime and safety concerns
HIGH
MEDIUM
University accommodation providers
Provision of student accommodation

HIGH
MEDIUM
General Sydney community
Environmental concerns
Visual impacts
Heritage concerns
MEDIUM
MEDIUM








Resources:

Barangaroo Consultation Report, 2011.

Barangaroo Delivery Authority, 2014, 'Overview of Barangaroo', viewed 22/10/2014 at:
http://www.barangaroo.com/media/203924/overview%20october%202014.pdf

Barnes, M, 2011, 'Barangaroo: threatening the local community?', Inner City Voice, Viewed 23/10/2014 at:
http://innersydneyvoice.org.au/pub/barangaroo-threatening-the-local-community/

Central Park, Sydney, 2014, 'Community Consultation', viewed 24/10/2014:
http://www.centralparksydney.com/explore/community-consultation

City of Sydney, 2014, 'Major Developments - Barangaroo', viewed 24/10/2014 at:
http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/vision/major-developments/barangaroo

City of Sydney, 2014, 'Major Developments – Central Park', viewed 24/10/2014 at:
http://www.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/vision/major-developments/central-park

Department of Planning and Environment, 2014, 'Barangaroo', NSW Government, Sydney, NSW, viewed 22/10/2014 at:
http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au/enus/developmentproposals/majordevelopments/barangaroo.aspx

Doutney, I, 2010, 'Barangaroo development plans opposed', Green Left, viewed 24/10/2014 at:
https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45350

Duxfield, F, 2010, 'Barangaroo consultations just 'going through the motions', Alt Media – City Hub, viewed 23/10/2014 at:
http://www.altmedia.net.au/barangaroo-consultations-just-%E2%80%98going-through-the-motions%E2%80%99/20112

Fraser's Property, 2013, 'Central Park, Sydney', viewed 25/10/2014 at:
http://www.frasersproperty.com.au/?page=sydneypark

Hasham, N, 2013, 'Uni students to star on Broadway as offices baulk at old brewery site', Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 25/10/2014:
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/uni-students-to-star-on-broadway-as-offices-baulk-at-old-brewery-site-20130514-2jkkq.html#ixzz3GmNcn8aK

Lend Lease, 2014, 'Community Development', Barangaroo South, viewed 23/10/2014 at:
http://www.barangaroosouth.com.au/community/community-updates

Lewicki, R, Saunders, D & Barry, B, 2010, 'Essentials of Negotiation'

Nicholls, S, 2014, 'James Packer's Barangaroo casino approval 'one of the fastest in history', chief regulator says', Sydney Morning Herald, viewed 24/10/2014 at:
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/james-packers-barangaroo-casino-approval-one-of-the-fastest-in-history-chief-regulator-says-20140811-102qzt.html#ixzz3GfY2udqb

Reinmuth, G, 2012, 'Barangaroo: the loss of trust?', The Conversation, viewed 23/10/2014 at:
http://theconversation.com/barangaroo-the-loss-of-trust-10676

University of Technology, Sydney, 2014, 'Development Negotiation Lecture Notes'.