A waterfront mini city in Liverpool, a campaigning council and a Sydney developer with a colourful past
Half an hour south-west of the racecourse lies a large swathe of industrial land, ripe for rezoning, Liverpool City Council declared.
A planning proposal for a $9 billion waterfront mini city was well advanced. It could be signed off 'with the stroke of the Premier's pen', the council's timely press release suggested.
Mayor Ned Mannoun called for an urgent meeting with the NSW premier and followed up with a direct text to Chris Minns. He hasn't heard back.
If the 31.4-hectare site is rezoned from light industrial to mixed use, major landholders Coronation Property and Leamac Property Group stand to make a windfall.
The developers have been advocating for rezoning for a decade and are currently locked in final negotiations with the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI).
If you have any information about a story, contact Amy Greenbank.
They are proposing to build 11,000 apartments over 30 to 40 years, a large retail hub, a primary school, pedestrian bridges, and an 8-kilometre foreshore walk
"Moore Point", as it will be known, is a "once-in-a-generation opportunity to deliver Australia's next Great Riverfront City", according to exhibited planning documents.
But the proposed high-rises will be built on a floodplain, as the site sits on a peninsula between the Georges River and Lake Moore.
A 2022 flood study found that if the development went ahead it would likely generate 25,000 vehicles, but the roads only had capacity for 5,500 evacuating cars in a "probable maximum flood".
"Noah's flood is not a planning benchmark," Mr Mannoun said, arguing the flood level criteria was unnecessarily restrictive and holding back housing.
The DPHI has asked the developers to conduct further flood modelling.
It's not the first time Mr Mannoun has publicly advocated for a Coronation project.
While in office in 2016, he featured in two promotional videos for the developer, supporting an earlier Liverpool project called the 'Paper Mill'.
"It's wonderful and it's so exciting, and it's great to be part of the project… Let's embrace it," he told viewers.
The high-rise was later hit with a building work rectification order, including for "uncontrolled cracking" in four basements.
Owners sued Coronation's building arm, MN Builders, and a subsidiary in the Supreme Court over alleged defects on common property.
In 2021, the council took legal action against Coronation over unpaid rates at the Shepherd Street site. The matter was resolved out of court.
Coronation also failed to deliver a promised boardwalk allowing direct access to the Georges River, which was a requirement under its 2017 voluntary planning agreement (VPA) with the council.
"We don't have an issue with them [Coronation]," Mr Mannoun said, adding he was unaware of the alleged defects in the Paper Mill.
A spokesperson for Coronation said it had largely fulfilled its VPA, and the "final portion" of the riverwalk works would be completed within three months, adding the rectification works on the Paper Mill site had been finished.
Liverpool City Council said the boardwalk would be delivered in six months and Coronation "had not failed to meet its obligations", as it was a complex project.
The VPA required the riverwalk to be completed before the Occupation Certificate was signed off, which was several years ago.
Mr Mannoun said he "pitches and promotes" a range of developers who had "good quality" projects in his council area.
He is not overly concerned about the optics of maintaining close proximity to developers, even with a looming inquiry into his council, which begins public hearings on July 14.
"Define too close. What's too close? If people want to meet with the mayor, they meet the mayor," he said.
In 2024 an interim investigation into Liverpool City Council by the Office of Local Government NSW alleged elected officials, "in particular the mayor", were intervening in the development assessment process.
"Every mayor and councillor makes representations … no-one can produce where I've done something inappropriate," Mr Mannoun told the ABC.
A spokesperson for Coronation said it maintained a "good working relationship" with local councillors and state and federal MPs.
Australian-owned and operated Coronation Property has been plagued by controversy in recent years.
The company currently has nine high-rise projects in the pipeline, which it estimates to be worth $5.7 billion.
However, in 2022 its building arm, MN Builders, narrowly avoided being stripped of its building registration.
After a brief Supreme Court battle, the company struck an enforceable undertaking with the Department of Customer Service and agreed to conduct an independent audit of its practices.
The company was also named in the former NSW building commissioner's resignation letter in 2022.
David Chandler briefly quit shortly after issuing MN Builders a stop work order over Coronation's Merrylands project 'Mason and Main'.
In his resignation letter, which was sent to the anti-corruption watchdog, Mr Chandler raised concerns about an alleged relationship between then-minister Eleni Petinos' office and Coronation.
He also stated he received a message from the former deputy premier John Barilaro, who had joined the Coronation board, shortly after issuing the order.
A spokesperson for Coronation said its Moore Point project would be the "jewel in the crown" for south-western Sydney, where there is a dire shortage of housing.
Coronation is represented by Premier Communications Group, where former NSW premier Morris Iemma is senior counsel.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
14 minutes ago
- ABC News
Queensland government strikes new deal with Bravus to defer royalties, expand Carmichael coal mine
The Queensland government has struck a new royalty deferral deal with the owners of the Carmichael coal mine in exchange for an expansion of its operations. The government has promised every deferred dollar will be repaid with interest by mining giant Bravus, formerly known as Adani, but won't reveal details, such as when the money will be paid. Premier David Crisafulli said Bravus would spend $50 million to open the next stage of the Central Queensland mine as part of the arrangement. The mine is expected to expand its production by 30 per cent over the next four years — reaching 16 million tonnes per annum. "That money will be used to expand the workers' village, create a new dam, a rail network hub for maintenance, and additional engineering works," Mr Crisafulli said. "More importantly, it opens the door for half a billion dollars of investment and will enable an expansion to the tune of about a third of this mine. "Today's announcement and the agreement ends years of hostility. More importantly, it will open the door for years of productivity." The former Labor government initially signed a royalty deferral deal with Bravus in 2020, which Treasurer David Janetzki suggested became subject to "proceedings". He said those proceedings would now end, with the LNP government reaching a new arrangement with the mining company. "It is clear Bravus will repay every dollar to the Queensland people with interest. That is locked in," Mr Janetzki said. Mr Janetzki would not say how much interest would be charged or when the deferred royalties would be paid. He claimed this was due to commercial in confidence arrangements agreed to under the Labor government's deal. Bravus chief operating officer Mick Crowe said the new deal would help the company build stability for the mine. "For Bravus, this is a 30 per cent expansion in our capacity," he said. "It's a big investment in the infrastructure that underpins the future. "We'll continue to grow and invest in the 1,200 people who work out here. This creates more certainty for them in the future." Shadow Treasurer Shannon Fentiman described the deferral as a "secret sweetheart deal to provide Adani with a royalty holiday". Greens MP Michael Berkman also accused Mr Crisafulli of giving Bravus a "free pass" to dig up more coal. "What are Queenslanders getting out of this deal, and if it's so great, why can't we see the details," he said. The government has insisted the only difference between the previous deal under Labor and the new deal was the $50 million investment from Bravus.
News.com.au
16 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Nurse loses almost $500k in savings after Australian Fiduciaries placed into liquidation
Experts have sounded the alarm after a Perth mum lost almost half a million dollars in life savings following the collapse of a superannuation fund. Western Australia nurse, Kathryn Shannon, had set up a self-managed super fund with Simple Super and transferred over $460,000 of hard-earned money over more than three decades. But its parent company, Australian Fiduciaries Limited (AFL), suddenly collapsed this year. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission sought asset preservation orders and appointed receivers to AFL through the Federal Court in June. Ms Shannon had made additional voluntary contributions throughout her working life to ensure she could comfortably retire, but she was left blindsided. 'I don't know how this could have happened. I never imagined I would face any difficulty with anything as simple as superannuation is supposed to be,' she said in an online post. 'I feel ripped off and the superannuation system is not safe. I am stressed about the uncertainty of my financial future. 'I now have doubt and fear about what my future will look like. Due to my age, the likelihood of earning enough to retire now is not possible.' Ms Shannon said she was left with many questions. She has flagged her case with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, claiming she had been given inappropriate and incorrect information and advice. Financial adviser and founder of Pivot Wealth, Ben Nash, said while it is appealing to manage your own super fund, it can also be a trap. 'The biggest risk is that people don't fully understand what they're getting into,' he told 'You're not just choosing investments. You're running a regulated fund, with all the legal, tax, and compliance obligations that come with it. 'The risk isn't just poor investment returns. It's picking dud assets (like high-risk property schemes or private investments), failing to meet your compliance obligations, or putting your trust in the wrong hands – like in this case. 'If the trustee or platform fails, you wear the consequences. There's no government guarantee, and compensation is limited.' Fellow financial adviser and director of independent Wealth Advice, Andy Darroch, told it was similar to swimming at a beach. 'If you're in an SMSF, you might not just be swimming outside the flags, but you might be swimming on an unpatrolled beach, and crucially, you might not realise this,' he said. 'It doesn't mean you'll get into trouble, but if you do, you might not have the assistance you would have if you were between the flags on a patrolled beach, which I would say is an industry super fund.' MORE: 'Kiss your pension goodbye': Radical plan to remove Boomers Mr Nash stressed self-managed funds are not for everyone. 'SMSFs are often sold on the dream of control, flexibility, or lower fees – but the reality is more complex and far less forgiving. Unless you have at least $500,000 in super, a well-thought-out investment strategy, and a strong reason to DIY (like holding property or private investments through the fund), an SMSF is usually more admin and risk than it's worth,' the Pivot Wealth founder said. Mr Darroch agreed with his counterpart's remarks. 'You're taking higher risks, personal obligations, costs to your time and money and in exchange for this you get far worse investments than what you can get in a vastly superior, significantly cheaper and enormously less risky industry fund super fund,' he said. 'More risk, more cost, more time and a worse super fund, that's not a deal I'd recommend for anyone, regardless of balance or age.' Ms Shannon's post received dozens of comments which offered little sympathy. 'Unfortunately this is best example of someone wants SMSF without being aware of risks involved. Good faith is nice to have but doesn't help. Risk awareness is important,' one wrote. 'You do understand you made a choice to invest or put your super in them? I think it's terrible what's happened but doubt the government will bail (you) out,' another added. has reached out to Ms Shannon for comment. It is understood some 600 Australian investors have been impacted, with about $160 million put into investment schemes offered by AFL since February 2020. AFL stopped distributing units in the schemes in September 2023. On August 8, Terry van der Velde and Matthew Hudson from SV partners were appointed as liquidators to AFL and more than a dozen other entities. A hearing on the case is set for September 4 in Brisbane.
ABC News
44 minutes ago
- ABC News
ACCC to investigate energy plans that promise savings but deliver poor value
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has announced it will investigate whether energy retailers are misleading consumers by advertising energy plans that promise savings yet actually provide poor value. This investigation follows a formal complaint filed by Australian Consumers' Association (CHOICE), which raised concerns that many plans marketed as "savings" deals are far from the cheapest options available. The investigation came after consumer group CHOICE filed its first 'designated complaint' to the ACCC in May. Under a new framework that came into effect in May the previous year, CHOICE is one of three bodies that can file a 'super complaint' directly with the ACCC about issues affecting consumers. Each body can file only one complaint per year. Once it is submitted, the ACCC is required to assess and publicly respond within 90 days. CHOICE decided to use its one complaint to flag concerns that energy retailers use words like 'saver' or 'savings' to promote energy plans that are far from the cheapest available. "At a time when Australians are increasingly worried about being able to afford to keep the lights on, this has had a big financial impact," Andy Kollmorgen, Investigations Editor at CHOICE, said in a statement. CHOICE's complaint points to a major issue with how energy retailers advertise "savings" plans. "In some instances, they were even more expensive than the retailer's standing offer," says Rosie Thomas, CHOICE director of campaigns and communications. "Many consumers rely on these representations as indicators of value to inform their decision-making, but we found that many of these names and descriptions may not reflect genuine value." According to the latest national CHOICE survey, 84 per cent of households are concerned about rising electricity prices. But with so many plans marketed with promises of savings, it's hard for consumers to tell if they're actually getting a better deal. "We are concerned that consumers may be misled or deceived by plan names or descriptions of plans that offer 'savings' that are not genuine, or that consumers may be discouraged from switching to cheaper plans that are available to them," ACCC deputy chair Catriona Lowe said. "It is essential that energy retailers provide clear and accurate information about their energy plans so that consumers can make informed decisions when choosing an energy provider and plan." The confusion doesn't stop at the "savings" labels. Many energy retailers use identical names for plans that come with different rates, leading to further confusion for consumers. This issue is especially prevalent with the "better offer" and "best offer" messages on energy bills, which are meant to alert customers to cheaper plans available within the same provider. Unfortunately, these plans aren't always cheaper. A recent decision from the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) requires retailers to provide extra information under "better offer" messages when reusing plan names. "Consumers are often encouraged to shop around in order to save on their energy bills, but that's impossible to do if the information they receive from retailers is inaccurate, incomplete or designed to overwhelm," says Ms Thomas. The ACCC said that after careful consideration, the issues raised by CHOICE relating to the use of identical plan names in "better offer" and "best offer" messaging, are "most effectively addressed through the review and law reform processes currently underway by the AER and the ESC" and not an ACCC investigation. If the ACCC finds that energy retailers are breaching Australian Consumer Law following its investigation, it may take enforcement action where appropriate. It may also "prepare industry guidance or contribute to policy or law reform initiatives".
