Why the Pasadena site on the northern beaches is so polarising
Feature: After a decade unoccupied, the once-popular Pasadena attraction is due to be reopened. Now debate has shifted to whether it should be acquired by the council. ROBBIE PATTERSON reports.
Manly
Don't miss out on the headlines from Manly. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Council considers other plans if it can’t purchase Pasadena
- Community group starts legal battle to stop Pasadena
An eyesore on the edge of one of Sydney’s most picturesque locations for almost a decade could soon be a trendy boutique hotel and events destination.
Pasadena, an 87-year-old building on the water’s edge at Church Point, was a popular wedding venue, motel and function centre but has been vacant since 2009.
Its deterioration, partly the result of several failed development plans, led to a Northern Beaches Council move to buy the building to make way for open space and parking. But with the building’s owner Paul Peterkin suggesting an opening is imminent, questions are surfacing on the worthiness of a compulsory acquisition.
Mr Peterkin told the Manly Daily he was committed to “delivering a great facility for the northern beaches”.
“This has been an interesting journey and I would like to thank the local and business support I have received,” he said. “Everyone felt the council would support this once a quality facility was in place.
“I am exhausted but so proud of what I and my family and team have achieved. I am so sure that Church Point and the local beaches region will be enjoying Pasadena for years to come.
“Pasadena is now in a perfect position for future generations to enjoy — it is a place for everyone.”
Former council administrator Dick Persson had resolved to buy the site — by compulsory acquisition if necessary — in August last year. Shortly after that council resolution, Mr Peterkin started work renovating the site, using construction approval the site had dating back to the 1960s. It is now near completion.
It is expected that the site — which will include a boutique hotel and events space, cafe and bar/restaurant with retail space fronting McCarrs Creek Rd — would be worth significantly more than when the acquisition was proposed.
The council will vote on Wednesday whether or not to progress with the acquisition. But it could all hinge on a legal battle set to take place next month.
The council had planned to buy the site with funds secured by Pittwater state MP Rob Stokes.
The amount of money available was not disclosed but is believed to be about $8 million. That has led to questions from some councillors that, if it could cost even more, where should they draw the line?
Councillors Rory Amon and Alex McTaggart have called for an urgent meeting to discuss backing out of the purchase.
“The forcible acquisition process is risky,” Cr Amon wrote in his briefing to councillors ahead of the meeting, scheduled for Wednesday.
“Once the formal forcible acquisition process is triggered, council must pay the amount that the State Government decides (through an independent process) and cannot back out if the amount is too high.
“If the council decides to compulsorily acquire your house and thinks it is worth $2 million and triggers the formal compulsory acquisition process, and the site is valued by the government at $20 million, then council has to pay that.”
While the focus is on whether or not the building should be bulldozed, Mr Persson’s original motion did not specifically state the building would be knocked down.
It states Pasadena should be reclassified as community land and a masterplan developed “to ensure maximum public benefit into the future, including converting the majority of the site to public space”.
Community opinion appears to be swaying, with Cr Amon putting an online poll to the community. Of 1860 respondents, 86 per cent called for the Pasadena to remain.
So, has the opportunity to buy the land passed the council by? If so, it would be the second time the council has missed out on buying the site. The former Pittwater council was outbid by Mr Peterkin in 2012, when he paid $2.4 million for it.
Despite a swing towards keeping the once-popular destination, the debate is quite polarising. Some offshore residents have expressed concern about parking being taken by visitors to the venue.
West Pittwater Community Association president Michael Weiner said parking was a major concern, as was the need to free up open space.
“The offshore residents, for the most part, feel the site should be acquired,” he said. “Essentially what is being proposed is going to exacerbate the congestion issues at the site. It is quite a large scheme being proposed.”
A 113-space carpark has just opened at Church Point — built by the council and partly funded by the State Government — but Mr Weiner said ultimately offshore residents would pay for it through the $5000 annual tag to park their cars there.
“The residents have crowdfunded their own infrastructure over the years. They paid for the commuter wharf, the parking structure — we will have paid for it in 10 years,” he said. “It is the first time myself and my wife can come home and not have to worry about walking a kilometre from the car to the boat to get to our house.”
Northern Beaches Mayor Michael Regan has said there could be other options explored but declined to go into any details until the councillors had met.
Mr Stokes expressed concerns about a lack of parking if the Pasadena were to reopen but said “if council changes its resolution it is really a matter for council”.
He said a number of projects had been completed by the council to improve the amenity and parking in the area but he was concerned it may not be enough. “There are longstanding challenges relating to car parking. The new carpark will go some way to alleviating those challenges,” he said.
“But I remain concerned that there is insufficient car parking for demand and this will be one of the real enduring issues that will have to be resolved.”
He said he supported the idea of buying the site when the council approached him but acknowledged the situation had changed.
“At the time the Pasadena had been derelict for a number of years and I was able to secure funding at the request of council towards their resolution,” he said.
A joint letter from Bayview-Church Point Residents Association, Scotland Island Residents’ Association, Church Point Friends and West Pittwater Community Association has called for the council to wait for the result of a legal challenge on the land, scheduled for mid-August.
“As the value of the Pasadena cannot be determined with any certainty until the legal matter is resolved we request, in the strongest terms, that you do not support the passing of the motion being put,” the letter said. “Further, we request that council waits until the legal matter has been resolved before making further determinations about the site.”
That legal action was to prevent any more work being done on the site and is being led by offshore residents, including former director of public prosecutions Nicholas Cowdery. The group is called the Church Point Community Projects Inc.
In June, Mr Cowdery said: “There are two areas of attack; one is what is claimed to be unlawful development work. It is supposedly based on a 1963 building approval, which the association says has lapsed, is not current, therefore the work has no lawful justification.”
Mr Peterkin has constantly argued his works are legal and have been deemed so by the council.