Mixed Use Development, Walker Street North Sydney

Please see the attached submission of Mr Richard Lakin, which we have been asked to lodge on his behalf.

Sydney’s housing shortage is one of the most pressing challenges facing both the city and the country. Delivering new, well-located housing is critical, and this site is ideally positioned for it. It sits at the centre of North Sydney’s transport network, being a short walk from the new Victoria Cross Metro and existing jobs, services and amenities.

This proposal helps address that shortage while also introducing retail and hotel uses that bring activity and energy to the precinct. The proposal capitalises on a rare inner-city site and supports the government’s broader aim of increasing housing supply in areas with strong public transport and employment access. The development will create and support jobs, visitors and residents, benefiting local businesses and the local economy.

High-quality housing is just as important as additional housing. The proposal features a contemporary tower design with thoughtful landscaping and a new pedestrian link between Walker Street and Little Walker Street, which will make the area more open and connected. These are the kinds of improvements that enhance how people experience the city.

My business operates nearby on Walker Street, and I’m familiar with the existing buildings at 153-157. They are dated and well overdue for renewal. This redevelopment will help the city centre feel more lived-in and active, not just during office hours.

Thank you for considering my submission, I hope to see the development approved.

Please see attached submission on behalf of Roderick Holdings.

Please see attached submission on behalf of the Former Owners and Current Tenants of 153-157 Walker Street.

It looks like they took the previously consented office tower, threw apartments in it, and called it a day. Lazy planning.

Not a good design for residential living. This should not be allowed because too many people inside in the tower will be in the shade during winter.

I heard about this project and know that I am not the only one who is concerned.

See attached submission on behalf of neighbour 141 Walker Street, North Sydney

See attached

Once again, we have another building that exceeds a ridiculous height limit to create more overshadowing to neighbouring residents and unsightly facades. We already have an enormous building approved in Arthur St so I don't see why another is needed directly behind it. The road of Walker St cannot handle to extra traffic that will already be accumulating as a result of the East Walker St/Hamden Ave development and the Arthur St development, let alone adding this into the mix. It is mostly a one lane either way street which cannot handle more cars on the road. These are not "affordable" housing....nothing in this area is. So, when there is already around 700 new units being built within 100m of this proposed development, I doubt it is needed and will not be going to people that actually need it. I sincerely hope that this monstrosity does not get approved considering the already large amount of units being added within 100m of this proposed project.

On a cursory review of the documents, Appendix JJ - Visual Impact assessment is clearly missing Sections 4.1 and 4.2 and perhaps others. I therefore request confirmation that this application in its entirety has been sense-checked by the department and that no other documents are faulty. At the very least, with regard to Appendix JJ, I request that the mssing sections be resubmitted, and that I be advised once completed, and that my 21 storey residential building, 221 Miller Street, be taken into account in the Visual Impact Assessment. This will allow me to perform my statutory duties properly with regard to my Owners Corportion.
John Mariano
Chairperson
Strata Plan 93339 and BMC
221 Miller Street
North Sydney

It does not take a professor, 'housing creator', consultant or any other title to know that this is a low quality, financially driven development that does not place much importance on quality of life. Our community is losing patience with bureaucratic overthinking.

It is not acceptable that a large amount of the apartments will not get any sun at the middle of winter. Why should this development block our views if it is not able to meet simple needs?

The tower includes a hotel, with a number of apartments above it that are not designed in a way that will encourage residents to stay put. These dark apartments could end up converting into serviced apartments that are part of the hotel, which would not help solve our housing issue.

I am writing in support of this project. We need more housing, and North Sydney has the infrastructure to support it. I work a block from this location, and I'm sorry to say this brutalist eyesore is not contributing much to the area. We already have too much office space and underground parking in North Sydney. More housing should help stop the suburb becoming a ghost town outside of work hours.

I think it's a real shame that in 2025 we are still seeing apartment designs that leave whole homes without a ray of winter sun. Trying to push stuff through like this makes the housing problem worse when it gets declined.

If the people who are trying to build this cannot meet the basic need for sun during winter, then this project should not be considered by the State. It will block views without any long term gain for the area or people in general.

If whole sections of the tower are dark and unappealing, people will not want to live there for long. It's only housing if people are not just 'staying' there. Our community is already a bit of a revolving door, and we need better homes than this.

I am very concerned by how dark some of these apartments might be in winter. People, especially families and kids, need proper sunlight. If whole apartments get no sun in the middle of winter, people will end up living in dark spaces that feel unhealthy.

Like most people, I want to see more housing in our area, but not if it means putting people in dark, expensive apartments that block views from surrounding buildings. That's not good planning, and it's unfair to everybody.

The attached objection must be considered under Section 4.15(1)(d) of the EP&A Act.

To: NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Re: SSD-82599709 – Mixed Use Development, Walker Street, North Sydney

Dear Assessment Team,

I wish to lodge my objection to the proposed Walker Street mixed-use development (SSD-82599709). While I support well-planned growth, this project in its current form is excessive, out of character, and places an unreasonable burden on the local community.

Overdevelopment and Scale

At 51 storeys, the proposal is far taller and bulkier than surrounding development and inconsistent with the intended scale under the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 and Development Control Plan 2025. Allowing a tower of this size sets a dangerous precedent for overdevelopment and erodes the unique character of North Sydney.

Amenity and Liveability

Overshadowing: Significant loss of sunlight will affect nearby residents and public areas during winter months, contrary to solar access objectives in the DCP.

Privacy & Views: The height and density compromise privacy and obstruct valued views.

Wind Impacts: Tall buildings of this scale generate wind tunnels, making the street environment less safe and comfortable for pedestrians.

Transport and Traffic

Walker Street and the wider precinct already experience heavy congestion. Adding hundreds of apartments, hotel guests and retail traffic will compound existing problems. The Guide to Transport Impact Assessment (Transport for NSW) requires robust modelling, yet the documentation provided fails to demonstrate how local roads, public transport, and pedestrian networks will cope.

Pressure on Infrastructure

North Sydney schools, transport, and community services are already stretched. A project of this scale will intensify demand without any clear commitment to infrastructure upgrades or meaningful community benefits.

Policy Alignment

The proposal departs from both local and state planning objectives without sufficient justification. State Significant Development status should not be used to override planning controls where the impacts so clearly outweigh any benefits.

Requested Outcome

I ask the Department to either refuse the proposal outright or require major revisions that:

Reduce the overall height and density;

Ensure compliance with solar access and overshadowing protections;

Provide genuine mitigation for traffic and parking impacts; and

Secure tangible contributions to local infrastructure and community facilities.

Closing

This project, as lodged, is not in the public interest. It undermines the amenity, safety, and liveability of North Sydney. I urge the Department to prioritise balanced development that respects the community and local planning framework.

Yours faithfully,

Dear Sir/Madam,

I write to formally object to the proposed mixed-use development at Walker Street, North Sydney (SSD-82599709). I am a local [resident/property owner/worker – adjust as relevant] and will be directly impacted by the excessive scale and adverse impacts of this proposal.

Grounds of Objection
1. Excessive Height and Density

The proposed 51-storey tower is grossly out of scale with the surrounding urban environment. It far exceeds the intent of the North Sydney Local Environmental Plan 2013 (NSLEP 2013) and the North Sydney Development Control Plan 2025, which seek to ensure developments are compatible with local character, protect solar access, and avoid excessive bulk.

The building’s height and massing will dominate the skyline, undermine view sharing, and create unacceptable overshadowing impacts. This is inconsistent with the North Sydney Centre Capacity and Land Use Strategy, which emphasises solar access and human-scaled development.

2. Amenity Impacts

Overshadowing: A tower of this magnitude will cast significant shadows on neighbouring residential properties and public spaces, particularly during mid-winter, contrary to DCP requirements for solar access between 10am and 2pm.

Privacy & Views: The proposed density and scale will diminish privacy and reduce views currently enjoyed by surrounding residents.

Wind & Microclimate: Tall buildings often create adverse wind effects and uncomfortable street-level conditions, undermining the quality of the public domain.

3. Traffic, Transport and Parking

The development is expected to generate significant additional traffic from its 296 residential units, hotel component, and retail uses. Walker Street and surrounding roads are already subject to congestion, particularly at peak times.

The proposal fails to demonstrate compliance with the Guide to Transport Impact Assessment (Transport for NSW), which requires comprehensive modelling of road capacity, public transport demand, and pedestrian safety. Inadequate loading, servicing, and parking provision will exacerbate traffic conflicts, noise, and safety issues for both residents and businesses.

4. Infrastructure and Social Services

The addition of several hundred new residents and visitors will place further strain on local infrastructure, including schools, public transport, healthcare, and open space. No clear plan has been presented to ensure that infrastructure upgrades will be delivered to match this growth. Without these, the project risks reducing the liveability of North Sydney.

5. Non-Compliance with Policy Intent

While the proposal seeks to rely on State Significant Development pathways, it still must demonstrate consistency with NSW planning policies and local planning controls. The current application does not adequately justify departures from maximum height and floor space ratio standards. Nor does it deliver sufficient public benefit to offset its negative impacts.

Requested Actions

For the reasons outlined above, I strongly object to the Walker Street proposal in its current form. I urge the Department to:

Refuse the application unless substantial changes are made; or

Require the applicant to significantly reduce the proposed height and density to comply with NSLEP and DCP controls;

Mandate improved solar access, setbacks, and wind mitigation measures;

Ensure a comprehensive traffic and transport impact assessment is undertaken, including cumulative effects of other approved developments;

Secure binding commitments to infrastructure contributions that address the increased demand on local services.

Conclusion

This proposal represents overdevelopment, inconsistent with the planning framework, and detrimental to the amenity, liveability, and infrastructure of North Sydney. I respectfully request that the Department refuse SSD-82599709 unless the scale is reduced and its impacts are properly addressed.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Yours sincerely,

I fully support the mixed use Development on Walker Street in North Sydney. I believe it will really add value to North Sydney

Objection to Planning Proposal – SSD-82599709

I write to lodge an objection to the above development proposal on the basis that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is inadequate and fails to properly address significant and cumulative impacts on the North Sydney community.

1. Cumulative Impacts Not Considered

The EIS does not assess the combined effect of this proposal with other major developments in the immediate area, including the St Francis Xavier site at Mackenzie and Blue Streets. The omission of cumulative assessment presents an unrealistic picture of impacts on traffic, amenity, and social infrastructure.

2. Traffic and Transport Impacts

The EIS claims traffic impacts during construction will be minimal. This is inaccurate. The site sits adjacent to a major freeway entrance and near a concentration of independent schools, where congestion is already severe during peak hours. Construction inevitably requires road and lane closures for vehicle and equipment movements, which will have significant knock-on effects.

Similarly, the claim that the operation of a 50+ storey residential and hotel tower will have little to no impact on local traffic is implausible. The EIS has not taken into account cumulative impacts of other recent, approved, and proposed high-density developments in the area.

3. Social Infrastructure and Green Space

The EIS states there will be no impact on social infrastructure. This is incorrect. The development substantially increases density without providing new open space or enhancements to existing green space. With recent residential growth, a new private school, and the loss of green space from freeway upgrades, local amenity is already stretched. This proposal compounds that pressure.

4. Schools and Childcare

The EIS asserts there will be no impact on local schools or childcare. This is demonstrably untrue. The local state High School has already reached or exceeded capacity, with catchment students turned away. New residential growth continues to strain already overburdened education facilities. Further development must be contingent on upgrading educational infrastructure.

5. Housing and Affordability

The assumption that North Sydney LGA will not meet its housing delivery targets is inconsistent with Council advice. Further, the proposed dwellings are luxury apartments, not contributing to genuine housing affordability. The minimal affordable housing allocation—just 3% (nine dwellings) and only for a fixed period—fails to deliver lasting affordable housing benefit and simply defers the problem.

6. Economic and Community Activation

The EIS suggests density alone will create a vibrant after-hours economy. This is simplistic and unsupported. True activation requires a deliberate mix of uses, public spaces, and programming. The proposal offers no evidence of how it will contribute to after-hours vibrancy beyond population growth.

7. Construction Fatigue and Resident Amenity

Residents of North Sydney already experience construction fatigue. We endure constant noise, dust, and road debris—often resulting in property damage such as flat tyres. Children’s routes to school are unsafe due to heavy vehicle traffic and poorly managed construction zones. These impacts are cumulative, ongoing, and inadequately addressed in the EIS.

8. Parking and Local Business Impacts

On-street parking along Walker Street is already scarce. Many small businesses rely on this parking for customer access. This proposal will remove or further reduce parking availability, undermining the viability of local businesses.

9. Alternative and Pre-Conditions

No additional major development should proceed until:
• Local schools and childcare facilities are expanded,
• Green space is increased and protected,
• Traffic management solutions are in place, and
• Permanent affordable housing commitments are secured.

Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I object to this proposal in its current form. The EIS underestimates the true impacts and fails to provide realistic mitigation measures. I respectfully request that the Department of Planning require a comprehensive cumulative impact assessment, robust infrastructure planning, and binding commitments to community benefit before this project is allowed to proceed.