Paddington residents fight plan to bulldoze ‘genuinely affordable’ units for luxury apartment block

2 hours ago 1

Eastern suburbs residents have launched a campaign of resistance against a proposed $78 million development that seeks to leverage the state government’s housing incentives to replace an older residential block with luxury apartments.

Sydney-based developer Toohey Miller wants to bulldoze a three-storey block of 27 studio apartments and several townhouses to make way for an eight-storey block of about 40 units on Oxford Street, opposite the heritage-listed Victoria Barracks military base, in Paddington.

An indicative artist’s impression of the proposed development at 160 Oxford Street in Paddington.

About 10 of the new homes would be affordable housing units offered at below-market rent for 15 years. A concept proposal includes shops and a four-level underground car park for 78 vehicles.

Woollahra independent councillor Harriet Price is among critics who say the proposal “makes a mockery” of the Minns government’s affordable rental housing bonus scheme, which is designed to boost supply by giving developers extra height and floor space if they include affordable homes.

But Planning Minister Paul Scully has argued “cities are not museums”, and insisted Sydney must change and evolve to ease the state’s housing shortage.

Price said the proposal was the first in the Paddington heritage conservation area to combine the government’s affordable housing scheme with the low- and mid-rise reforms to encourage buildings up to six storeys near town centres. She said the developer was trying to “double-dip for a staggering uplift of five extra storeys”.

“This proposal is replacing 27 genuinely affordable dwellings with luxury apartments and only [up to] 12 temporary ‘discounted’ dwellings,” Price said.

The backlash underscores a growing distaste for developers using policies designed to boost housing supply to knock down Sydney’s older, cheaper apartments for larger, expensive units – often resulting in a loss of relatively affordable homes.

Paddington resident Philip Clark said the proposed Oxford Street complex was “overkill” and “way too big” for the spot, which is surrounded by old sandstone workers cottages of one or two storeys.

Locals mobilised against the plan have started an online petition, dubbed “Stop the Paddington tower”.

“This is a cynical use of the [planning] legislation. It doesn’t achieve any of the government’s objectives – it’s going from 32 dwellings to 40 dwellings. It’s an eight-dwelling increase, and yet it’s a net loss of genuinely affordable homes,” Clark said.

Grey (pictured) is one of the renters living in a block of 27 studio apartments in Paddington set to be demolished.

Clark said the residents of the studio apartments had recently faced a series of rent increases, but most were paying somewhere between $400 and $550 a week. “They’re not going to charge that for the new apartments, they’ll be going for more like $1500 or $2000 a week,” Clark said.

“The residents know they’re doomed. They’ll have to move, and they’ll have to move far away.”

A resident, known as Grey, who has lived in the block for nine years, said the comparatively affordable rent attracted university students and creatives, and its destruction would be “a massive loss”.

“It’s a place that really serves a purpose in Paddington, and what they’re proposing doesn’t.”

In a letter supporting the concept, architect Matthew Pullinger noted the use of the two planning policies resulted in a “significant uplift in development capacity” requiring a “high degree of design skill ... to achieve an appropriately nuanced contextual fit and to properly mitigate against the impacts of increased building scale and density”.

However, the letter said Oxford Street had greater “carrying capacity” for larger buildings than surrounding streets. Planning documents also stated that “no unreasonable impacts arise from the proposed building form, its density or height, and analysis … demonstrates that neighbouring properties retain views and appropriate levels of solar access”.

Developer Toohey Miller did not respond to a request for comment. It is yet to submit a development application, which would be assessed by the Planning Department as “state significant”.

The developer says the proposal will provide one- to three-bedroom units close to shops and public transport, include 15 per cent affordable housing for key workers, and improve the streetscape.

Price will use a notice of motion at Tuesday’s council meeting to highlight the community’s “significant concerns” about the potential loss of affordable homes, encroachment on heritage assets, overshadowing of public space on Oxford Street, public consultation, and traffic congestion.

She said recent changes to planning laws that cut the public exhibition period for state significant developments to 14 days made it harder for residents and councils to contribute to crucial decisions.

Scully said the government had approved 6356 homes, including 2116 affordable housing dwellings, under its infill affordable housing scheme.

The planning minister said the 15-year minimum timeframe for properties offered at below-market rent would create a “rolling supply” of affordable housing across the state, and the government was “restoring housing choice and diversity, rebalancing housing growth in Sydney towards existing infrastructure and where there has been big infrastructure investments”.

But Clark warned it was “a slippery slope”.

“Our concern is this will get approved, then the same thing will happen to the block next door, and the gym, candle shop and [high-end fashion retailer] Scanlan Theodore will go, and it’ll be another Bondi Junction,” he said.

“I understand the need for housing and progress. But I think the pendulum’s swung too far.”