My calls for Council to develop a urban renewal masterplan for Kings Cross taking a leaf from former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's success with Time Square has been reported by the Sydney Morning Herald and 2BL today. I will be asking more about this at Monday night's Council meeting. See the Media Release - Kings Cross Revitalisation here.
More spice, less vice for Kings Cross
By Tim Dick Urban Affairs Reporter SMH
September 7, 2005
Landlords of Kings Cross sex clubs, striptease venues, adult shops and some pubs should be rewarded for giving up vice with approvals to build bigger buildings with "sophisticated" tenants, the City of Sydney councillor Shayne Mallard says.
The council is struggling to deal with a rapidly changing area, a string of vacant shops along Darlinghurst Road, and plans to create a "city of villages", of which the Lord Mayor, Clover Moore, wants Kings Cross to be one.
Under the Mallard scheme, property owners would be given one-off development bonuses if they agreed to the cancellation of their rights to continue previously approved sex and alcohol businesses, known as existing-use rights. Such bonuses would allow an extra floor to be built on a building in a street of predominantly three-storey properties, with the hope it would encourage developers to undertake a diverse range of projects.
The Lord Mayor wanted to wait to deal with buildings along Darlinghurst Road as part of the new City Plan, a huge document being developed for the inner city, said her spokesman, Jeff Lewis. But he did not rule out developer bonuses, saying the suggestion should be dealt with as part of the wider review. "We'll be reviewing all these things," he said.
Cr Mallard wants to rid the Cross of its "sleaziest" sex businesses, making the area "naughty but nice" - a position not far from that of Cr Moore. Recently she announced plans to restrict the area's strip-club spruikers, though she has criticised the former South Sydney Council for awarding developers with rights to build higher buildings in return for providing community facilities.
Cr Mallard wants to mimic the former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani, who used council powers to acquire buildings used for sex, cancel the rights to do so, and develop them for other purposes. "The sleazier element of [the sex industry], in my view, is almost obsolete anyway," he said. "[It] is right to … get the area reborn in more of a sort of sophisticated style. This is just part of the evolution. The sleaziest parts of the sex industry, with the spruikers and the strip girls and the little cubicles and all that stuff … are causing the most grief to the residents and stopping people going down there to the Cross."
But few property owners would redevelop their buildings when height limits made it not worth the risk, he said, so bonuses needed to be part of the City Plan.
The idea is backed by the Kings Cross Partnership, a local business group. Unlike Cr Mallard, though, the group does not want to rid the main strip of its four strip clubs, two cabarets, five sex shops and brothel. Instead, it says the Cross needs a much broader variety of restaurants, shops and other businesses to prove attractive, which Cr Mallard's plan should help to achieve.
NAUGHTY BUT NICE
. City of Sydney preparing new plan for central city, including Kings Cross.
. Council grappling with drug problems, shop vacancies and rapidly gentrifying surrounding area.
. Owners of sex industry buildings to be encouraged to develop other businesses
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Where's the 'naughty' in your plan, Clr Mallard?
Typical Liberal ploy - destroy any culture you don't like by doing favours to your developer mates. Neat. Or do you only define culture as the ballet and the opera?
I suppose we would see the sun blocked out from darlo road by a string of Toaster-style clones.Gorgeous
At long last someone is doing something. Kings Cross needs to be restored to the elegant bohemianism it had before American R&R in the '60s introduced heroin. Anyone who has seen the transformation of Times Square would agree with you. (That restoration also had its detractors in the early days.) Sydney has dramatically fallen behind Melbourne and Brisbane in its urban renewal (e.g. St Kilda and Fortitude Valley), and I don't think most Sydneysiders are aware of this. It really needs to pick up the pace. Go to it!
My plan invites the building owners- most of whom are long time property owners in the Cross (not my developer mates - whoever they are) to surrender the sex industry use rights on their site in return for an urban renewal incentive. This is not a new concept. I have said all along that the owners can reapply for new sex industry uses but Council can mainatin much better control over the useage and management of a new application. The 'Naughty' is still there. The sleeze will be harder to find.
PS Darlinghurst Road is already zoned 24 metres high (that's 8 floors!). It has been held back by a contradictory 3:1 FSR (floor spavce ratio to plot). My proposal might offer say a 1.0 FSR bonus- equivalnt to an additional floor. Not Toaster material.
"Clr article Mallard wants...to use council powers to acquire buildings" according to Tim Dick's article [paragraph 6]
You can't get much clearer than that.
Are you mad Mallard?
This would cost about $10m per building at today's prices.
We can't afford this zany idea.
And what will happen to the sex clubs council will move out?
They will rent elsewhere - so council must buy these buildings as well. And so it goes on.
At this rate Council will be broke within 12 months and rates will need to go up 500%. No thanks.
What inanity thought this scheme up?
Barry - ratepayer
So Shane wants to buy up or "acquire" the sex club buildings.
Porkys, Love Machine, Stripperrama, Playbirds and the other two are going to cost about $10m each minimum.
Then there are the costs of buying up the remainder of their leases, about $1m each, and the costs of redesigning and refurbishing the buildings, another $1m each.
All up $72m.
Where is the responsibility in this suggestion I do not know.
And then what?
The sex clubs move down the road and Council is left with 6 buildings in one street it can't rent, just as its Woolworths building is more than half empty.
What an expensive and financially suicidal scheme this is.
Jane @Woolloomooloo
How can Shayne Mallard say his buy-back-a-sex-club scheme has nothing to do with the Kings Cross Partnership when the Sydney Morning Herald article he publishes along side it says clearly:
"the idea is backed by the Kings Cross Partnership" (paragraph 7)
How can a group like that support a scheme they know nothing about?
Of course it has everything to do with this developer-dominated group.
Business is business.
And business groups support schemes promoting more business. It's their job.
Sorry Shayne - not convincing.
Robert Stavos - business owner
Why the assumption that everyone who wants to improve the quality of buildings and business in Darlinghurst Road is in league with developers and contruction unions? Maybe some locals just want better.
Residents simply dont want more density in what is already one of the densest inner suburban areas in Australia.
Floor space ratios are there to control densities. They should be reduced not increased.
Shayne is already on the record in the two articles on Significant Trees and the need for green spaces on this web site as sayingg we need more open space and that this area is already overdeveloped.
This "let's just keep building" mentaliy went out with the 70's.
Business only looks after business.
James(is that your real name?), thanks for your virtual anonymous flaming of my blog site - not. let us know your one so we can enjoy your intellectual brilliance and courage for open debate.
All donations to my campaigns are disclosed per the laws of Australia and policies of Council. I sincerely thank those who support my campaigns because without them (and its the same for Greens or Clover Moore - dont duck that one) we could not get our message out in the campaign. SM
All donations to my campaigns are disclosed per the laws of Australia and policies of Council. If you have such a concern about one Coucnillor then you would be aware that I have been an vocal advocate at Council, within the party and at the NSW Local Government Association that all donations to campaigns in local government be restricted to induviduals only and capped at $2,000 per annum. Check out the Greens donations return where many induviduals have donated ten of thousands of dollars. Where did this money come from - not disclosed? Until all parties and candidates agree to this policy it will not work. SM
Post a Comment