Iris Capital's shot at redemption after EastEnd proposal refused

The $159.6 million third and fourth stage of the project will go to a review hearing today with the support of City of Newcastle (CN), which commissioned an independent report to the panel recommending it be approved.

The developer requested a review of the refusal in June, the second chance sparking anger from Newcastle East residents, the Newcastle Club, National Trust and Anglican Dean Katherine Bowyer who thought the issue had been put to bed.

National Trust Hunter branch chair Mark Metrikas said the same issues that led to the proposal being refused in May still existed.

"I liken it to playing a grand final and being unhappy with the result," he said.

"So you get another umpire in, but you don't get to play the game again."

Newcastle Club asset manager Ian Baker said they felt that the loss of views from the club had never properly been taken into account.

"This is just a review, it's not a new modification," he said.

"Except there's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of new documents that have been put forward by the developer, but it really should just be a review of the old documentation.

"They're basically saying, in as simple terms as they can, 'We've already lost a view so what's a bit more? It doesn't matter'. Technically that is not correct."

The Newcastle Herald understands letters have been sent to the Planning Panel Secretariat raising potential conflicts of interest with members of the panel assessing the review.

It is understood the letters ask for former CN councillor and property lawyer Jason Dunn and panel chair Brian Kirk to be removed.

Between June and September, 252 submissions were received on the proposal, 116 against and 136 in support.

The council hired consultant town planners Patch Planning, along with Envisage Consulting, to undertake an independent review assessment.

The report said the proposal was "readily assessable" as it could be considered substantially the same development as the concept DA.

"In relation to consideration of impacts, it is considered that the modification is supportable on grounds of private view loss, public view loss, heritage and car parking," the report said.

"While it is acknowledged that some impacts will occur beyond those that were envisaged under the original concept DA, on balance, these are considered acceptable and in the public interest."

The report said the modification would enable an "enhanced and improved" outcome at the site, resulting in "substantial public benefit", taking advantage of the "fortuitous demolition" of the former CN car park on King Street to deliver a visual corridor between Christ Church Cathedral and Newcastle Harbour.

"It will deliver a substantially enhanced Market Square and surrounding public domain amenity, and the provision of a well considered architectural development which exhibits design excellence," the report said.

"In addition, it will enable the delivery of much needed new homes, which will assist in tackling the housing crisis, as well as additional employment generating floor space (which will further contribute to the revitalisation of the Newcastle City Centre)."

Newcastle East Residents' Group representative Karen Read said their concern was that the proponent had not accepted the "referee's decision" and would now have a new panel appointed to review the proposal.

"Some of the documentation that they provided, you know, how they respect heritage, is just nonsense," she said.

"They don't respect heritage at all, and it's just, it's all motherhood statements, really."

The panel refused the project in May, arguing it was not satisfied the modification application was substantially the same as the concept approval.

In its reasons, the panel said the modification application would have "unacceptable cumulative impacts" on public and private views and was therefore "unacceptable".

The Herald contacted Iris Capital for comment.

Dean Bowyer said the proposal "steals sight lines" and disenfranchises Novocastrians from a view of the cathedral, which belongs to them.

"Newcastle was built along sight lines to the cathedral," she said.

"Development that obscures that not only obscures the views to the cathedral, but that understanding of how we are oriented as a city and heritage aspects.

"The developer is entitled to ask for a review, I'm not opposed to development ... I just question whether it should come at the cost of losing things that are important to the city."

In its reasons for refusal, the panel also said the development would create "unacceptable impacts" due to parking deficiencies.

The 2023 amended development application proposed a deficit of 113 parking spaces in light of the council's decision to demolish its King Street car park, which Iris had been relying on to provide parking spots to support the new apartments.

Iris's planned revisions to the concept approval included adding height and mass to several apartment blocks in return for moving buildings to create a public square between Market Street and King Street.

The council last year approved the demolition of buildings on the site, including an old timber house the National Trust classed as an important part of the city's heritage.

The planning panel hearing will be held today at 11am.