Dear NSW Planning Department,
I object to the proposal for the development at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington 2021 for the following reasons.
1. Permanent loss of Paddington’s heritage character
The project proposes to develop a quiet historically intact area rich with character and community. The few existing modern additions in the area have carefully approached the streetscape with consideration to height and surrounding architectural style successfully. The redevelopment of the Royal Women’s Hospital site and the former Greenwood Tree Hotel are good examples of how the local character can be maintained when good design principles are applied. They are mostly designed to merge with and enhance the local culture, environment, materials and history of the place. However, the proposal being considered at 160 Oxford Street would be an eye sore, visible from far and wide and would disturb the immediate local character and residents. The proposal does not consider, merge with or enhance the local area with its massive scale and its ugly design and will swamp the area with a massive number of people that the local area cannot cope with. The proposed out-of-proportion size and modern design will destroy a small historic area and have negative ripple effects around the area.
2. The proposal is too big and too high. The proposal should be reconsidered for several reasons:
o The height of the building is completely out of character with the immediate area and means there would be significant overshadowing and loss of privacy for local residents.
o There would long term be traffic chaos and parking congestion. The development would bring too many people to an area that already has a delicately balanced, relatively high density. The parking in the area is already highly problematic and is exacerbated when there’s an event at Moore Park and every day with tradesman working on renovations. A development this big would bring too many additional people. Regardless of whether new residents have a parking spot, their movements will cause added congestion, and visitors will transform the immediate area from a harmonious community to chaotic frustration leading to inevitable loss of liveability.
o The increased number of people would need more public transport, which does not appear to have been considered. Already, residents wait for extended times to get on a bus at peak times, with buses driving past bus stops too full to stop to collect new passengers. What will happen with more people? More buses is not the answer, that would mean more traffic on the road and more noise and more congestion.
o The proposal will add more cars and create dangers for cyclists. Compared with the apartment block currently occupying the site, the proposed development will add approximately 60 cars, equivalent to the number of cars owned by all the houses on all of Gipps, Spring, Shadforth and Prospect Streets. The massive increase in the number of cars will increase congestion, clash with cyclists on Oxford Street and inevitably lead to accidents and road rage incidents at the junction of Shadforth and Oxford Streets.

3. The claim that the proposal will allow for affordable housing is completely false. The current apartment block that occupies the site offers entirely affordable housing for the long term. The proposed development only offers a small proportion of affordable housing, and this will be limited to about 10 years. So the new development would result in the removal all affordable housing for the 2-3 years build, a reduced amount for about 10 years and then zero affordable housing for the long term. This is against the Government’s goals and against what I would expect from a Labor Government - which is supposed to look after people. If this is allowed to proceed, I will despair about who I can vote for.

4. Allowing this project to go ahead is a dangerous precedent to set and would open the door to other developments that ruin Sydney’s architectural heritage. Did we not learn from the Green Bans of the 1970s? We only have the renowned and beautiful streets of Paddington, parts of Potts Point and The Rocks thanks to people who understood the importance of preserving heritage buildings and communities.

Please consider the impact of this proposal carefully.
Sincerely,
Kate Minogue

I am writing to object to the proposed development (SSD-97528708) at 148–160 Oxford Street, 6 Shadforth Street and 13 Gipps Street.
I lived in Shadforth Street for many decades and I continue to work in the neighbourhood. Because of this long-term connection, I experience the daily reality of how the streets function, how businesses operate, and how development decisions affect residents and workers.
Local residents bring an important perspective that cannot be captured by consultants’ reports or traffic modelling alone. Those of us who live and work here observe how traffic actually moves through the streets, where congestion forms, how deliveries occur, and how construction affects small businesses. NSW and Paddington residents deserve to have these lived experiences considered in planning decisions that will shape the neighbourhood.
One of my major concerns is the net loss of affordable housing in this proposal. Oxford Street has historically supported a diverse community including long-term renters, workers in local hospitality and retail, and people on modest incomes. Removing affordable housing from the area risks accelerating the loss of that diversity and replacing it with housing that is financially out of reach for many who currently contribute to the character and functioning of the neighbourhood.
Traffic impacts from the proposed underground carpark are also deeply concerning. The streets surrounding the site—Gipps Street, Shadforth Street and Liverpool Street—are narrow local streets that were never designed to handle large volumes of traffic entering and exiting a major development. Gipps and Shadforth Streets in particular are relatively narrow residential streets where cars often park along both sides, leaving limited room for vehicles to pass. Deliveries frequently require vehicles to stop briefly in the street, and pedestrians regularly step off narrow footpaths to move around obstacles. Introducing significant carpark traffic into this environment risks congestion, safety issues, and conflict between vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians.
From daily observation, these streets already experience congestion during peak hours and when delivery vehicles stop along Oxford Street and surrounding side streets. Traffic modelling in development applications often assumes smooth traffic flow, but that does not reflect the reality of these constrained local streets. Even small increases in traffic volumes can quickly lead to queues and blocked intersections.
Construction impacts are another serious concern, particularly for local businesses. Oxford Street has many small, independent businesses that rely heavily on passing foot traffic. Extended construction works—potentially lasting several years—would likely reduce pedestrian access, create noise and dust, and disrupt deliveries. Many local businesses are still recovering from previous economic disruptions, and prolonged construction could cause lasting financial harm or force some to close.
The cumulative impacts of multiple nearby projects must also be considered. The construction of the Oxford Street cycle lane has already altered traffic patterns and reduced road capacity. In addition, there is the possibility of future redevelopment associated with Victoria Barracks. When combined with a large new development at this site, these projects could significantly change traffic volumes and movement patterns across the area. Assessing this development in isolation does not reflect the real cumulative pressure that the local street network will face.
Another key concern is the protection of the Paddington Conservation Area. Paddington’s heritage streetscape is one of its defining characteristics, with terrace houses, narrow streets and historic buildings forming a coherent urban landscape. Developments that introduce excessive scale, bulk or intensity risk undermining that character. Protecting the conservation area should be a priority, not only for residents but for the broader cultural heritage of Sydney.
I am also concerned about the potential impact of extensive underground excavation and drilling required for the basement levels of the development. Paddington contains many very old stone and masonry buildings, some dating back well over a century. There is a real risk that vibration, ground movement or structural changes associated with deep excavation could damage these historic structures, many of which were not built to withstand nearby large-scale underground construction.

Ultimately, planning decisions should recognise that neighbourhoods like Paddington function as complex local ecosystems. Residents, workers, visitors and businesses all rely on the existing street network and built environment. A development of this scale risks placing pressures on streets, infrastructure and businesses that were never designed for this level of intensity.
For these reasons, I respectfully object to the proposed development under application SSD-97528708. I urge decision-makers to give serious consideration to the lived experience of local residents and workers, the protection of the Paddington Conservation Area, the loss of affordable housing, and the real-world traffic and economic impacts this development would create.
Thank you for considering this submission.

Objection to MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT WITH INFILL AFFORDABLE HOUSING - 160 OXFORD STREET, PADDINGTON

Application No: SSD97528708
Location: 142148 and 160 Oxford Street, 13 Gipps Street, 6 Shadforth Street, Paddington
Applicant: The Trustee for TM NO. 8 DEVELOPMENT UNIT TRUST
Council Area: Woollahra Municipality
Consent Authority: Minister for Planning and Public Spaces

Objector: Ms Madeleine Catherine Kortt
Address: 12 Shadforth St Paddington NSW
Phone: 0438 642 045
Email: [email protected]

I, Madeleine Kortt, wish to formally object to the proposed mixed use development with infill affordable housing at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington.

My young family and I reside at 12 Shadforth Street, Paddington, which is located two houses from 6 Shadforth Street, Paddington and in very close proximity to the proposed development site.

Initially, I welcomed the idea of redevelopment in this location. A well designed building with active ground floor retail has the potential to contribute positively to the revitalisation of Oxford Street and provide valuable services for the local community. However, after reviewing the plans in more detail, I have significant concerns regarding the scale of the development and its direct impacts on nearby residential properties, including my own.

Privacy and Overlooking

My primary concern relates to privacy impacts. The proposed apartments include balconies on the northern side of the building that will directly overlook my property. These balconies appear to have clear sightlines into both my courtyard and the window of my main bedroom.

As residents of a small terrace house, outdoor space is limited. Our courtyard is an essential extension of our living space and is used daily for our young son to play, for family meals, and for spending time with friends and relatives. The level of overlooking created by the proposed development would significantly reduce our privacy and diminish our ability to comfortably use this space.

Traffic and Safety on Shadforth Street

My second major concern relates to the impact the development will have on traffic volumes and safety along Shadforth Street, Paddington, particularly given that the proposed access to the building’s car park is planned from this street.

My front door opens directly onto the footpath, which measures approximately 1.45 metres in width from my doorstep to the edge of the kerb. This footpath is already very narrow.

Shadforth Street currently operates as a two way street providing access to Oxford Street, Liverpool Street and Gipps Street, yet its width does not allow two vehicles to comfortably pass each other at the same time. As a result, drivers must often wait either at the entrance from Oxford Street or at the corner of Gipps Street and Liverpool Street.

This situation already causes regular congestion and becomes significantly worse during events held at nearby stadiums such as Sydney Football Stadium and Sydney Cricket Ground. While these events contribute positively to the vibrancy of the area, they also bring heavy traffic to surrounding residential streets.

With an additional 83 vehicles associated with the proposed development, traffic pressure on Shadforth Street will inevitably increase. As a parent of an 18 month old child, this raises serious safety concerns when entering and exiting our home. Increased congestion in such a narrow street will make daily access more difficult and potentially unsafe for residents and pedestrians.

Shadowing

I note that the architectural drawings only provide shadow diagrams for 21 June between 9:00am and 3:00pm, which represents a six hour period on a single day of the year.

This limited information does not provide sufficient evidence of the overall shadowing impacts the development may have throughout the year. I currently receive consistent sunlight across all seasons and would like to see a more comprehensive shadow analysis provided so residents can fully understand the potential impact on their properties.

Parking and Construction Impacts

Parking in Paddington is already extremely limited. During the construction period, the presence of tradespeople, construction vehicles and daily deliveries will place additional pressure on local streets, particularly Shadforth Street, which is likely to be a primary access point for the site.

My family and I currently hold resident permits within the Paddington 1 parking zone, which allows us to park in surrounding streets. A significant increase in vehicles associated with construction and the completed development will further reduce the availability of parking for residents, as well as for visitors to local businesses, cafés and restaurants that contribute to the vibrancy of the Paddington area.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I object to the proposed development at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington and 6 Shadforth Street, Paddington in its current form due to the significant impacts it will have on my home and family.

I respectfully request that the proposal be reconsidered with amendments to reduce the height and scale of the building, which would in turn reduce the number of apartments, lessen the demand for parking, and mitigate traffic congestion on Shadforth Street. A reduction in height may also address the significant privacy concerns associated with the proposed balconies overlooking neighbouring properties.

Application reference: SSD-97528708

To whom it may concern. My name is Kusal Meemeduma and I am a resident of Paddington and live at 12 Shadforth st Paddington NSW 2021, a property directly impacted by the proposed development.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed development at 160 Oxford Street, Paddington. My objection relates primarily to the impacts the development will have on my house 12 Shadforth Street and my young family, specifically the significant increase in traffic from construction / ongoing use due to the proposed garage entrance on Shadforth Street, and the loss of privacy caused by the proposed nine-storey building overlooking our home on 12 Shadforth Street.

We have lived in the Paddington area for some time and value the unique character and scale that defines the neighbourhood. Shadforth Street in particular is a small, quiet residential street that currently experiences low traffic volumes compared to Oxford Street. The proposal to place the primary garage entrance for a major development on Shadforth Street will fundamentally change the nature of the street and create ongoing impacts for us residents.

Shadforth Street was never designed to accommodate significant vehicle traffic. It is narrow, residential, and frequently used by residents, pedestrians, and visitors walking through the neighbourhood. Introducing the primary vehicle access point for a large multi-storey development will significantly increase the number of vehicles entering and exiting the street on a daily basis, particularly during proposed construction.

The proposal effectively redirects traffic that would normally be expected to access a development from a major road like Oxford Street onto a quiet residential street. This creates an unfair and disproportionate burden on the residents of Shadforth Street.

I am particularly concerned that traffic modelling underestimates the real-world impacts of residential and mixed-use developments. Vehicles associated with deliveries, service providers, rideshare vehicles, and visitors can significantly increase traffic volumes beyond what is projected in formal assessments. Over time, this can fundamentally change the character and liveability of the street.

Another major concern I have is the proposed height of the development. At nine storeys, the building will be substantially taller than surrounding residential structures. As currently proposed, it will directly overlook our home at 12 Shadforth Street. A structure of this height will introduce multiple levels of windows, balconies, and vantage points that allow direct views into neighbouring properties, including our outdoor space and internal living area.

The impact of this is significant given we have a young child. We will experience a loss of privacy in our home and garden thats meant to feel safe, private, and sheltered from public view. The sense of being overlooked by a large multi-storey building will significantly affect how we use our home, reducing the enjoyment of outdoor spaces and limiting natural light and outlook.

When developments of this scale are approved without sufficient regard for surrounding residential streets, the cumulative impacts can be substantial. Increased traffic, noise and loss of privacy will erode the quality of our home.

While redevelopment and growth are inevitable in a city like Sydney, it is essential that such growth is managed carefully and sensitively, particularly in established residential areas. Developments should respect the scale, amenity, and character of surrounding streets rather than imposing disproportionate impacts on them.

In this case, the proposed garage access from Shadforth Street and the height of the nine-storey building place an undue burden on the immediate residential environment. These design choices appear to prioritise development yield over the wellbeing of existing residents.

Given these concerns, I respectfully request that the consent authority consider the following issues the following issues:

- The suitability of locating the primary garage entrance on Shadforth Street and the associated traffic impacts on a quiet residential street.
- The adequacy of traffic impact assessments and whether they fully reflect the long-term realities of increased vehicle movements.
- The loss of privacy for 12 Shadforth Street annd appropriateness of a nine-storey structure within the existing built context of Paddington.
- Whether design modifications could reduce the height, bulk, or overlooking impacts on nearby homes.

Regards, Kusal Meemeduma

12 Shadforth Street Paddington 2021 NSW

Objection 160 Oxford Street


This is a gross misuse of a low cost housing initiative,it takes 27 affordable housing units and delivers 0. There is nothing affordable about 70-80% rents on expensive up market units that can be sold 15 years later. This initiative  is designed for diverse communities, low income and low to middle income.



> This proposal pushes 63 cars, garbage removal and delivery trucks onto small narrow side streets. The traffic report on Shadforth Street does not represent actual traffic flows in this congested street where only 1 car can pass through at a time


> This is  an area where most residents use public transport, ride share etc.The car park should be at most 1 level.


Woollahra Council has erected bollards to protect houses on Shadforth Street from trucks driving into footpaths and hitting properties leading to substantial damage. All access to site has to be off Oxford Street on western end which is lower, therefore more practical for access. This includes construction, where the builder adapts to Oxford Street traffic conditions including clearways.



The levels of City of Sydney redevelopment between Riley Street and Taylor Square is 3 storey plus smaller upper level. There are no buildings on Oxford Street Paddington in Woollahra Municipality above 3 storeys plus a rooftop.  


Depending on the documents this is a 7,8 or 9 storey structure.What is the truth?


With 30 new luxury apartments and a reduction in affordable housing from 27 to 0, the development proposes a perverse application of the Affordable Housing Provisions.

Reading the Legislation, especially the primary objectives, this proposal is a fail. The relevant documentation shows it should be for a diverse community such as low income, low to middle income and seniors


Giving 30% extra height due to LCC provision  for no real low cost housing is outrageous 


We are deeply concerned regarding degradation of structure of our property which was built around 125 years ago, and were built for staff from Victoria Barracks.The foundations will with old Heritage buildings adjacent  withstand the excavations of this magnitude.


This is a potential Mascot Towers type scenario with old Heritage buildings adjacent  withstand the excavations of this magnitude


The constant run off of rain water from Victoria Barracks will require constant work


Given the number of developers before the courts re building standards and tax matters,all responsibility must be personally with directors to prevent use of corporate malfeasance. The Toohey Miller structure seems designed to avoid accountability.


Below are relevant parts of the Legislation in the attachments,which should be relevant to deny this proposal in full


There needs to be an Independent public inquiry, as the communication with the Toohey Miller is token, Zoom meeting was talking at residents and cherry picking the questions..


The idea of having a structure of this magnitude overlooking an active military base is beyond belief.

Not able to upload attachments

Principles of Policy

The principles of this Policy are as follows—

(a)  enabling the development of diverse housing types, including purpose-built rental housing,

(b)  encouraging the development of housing that will meet the needs of more vulnerable members of the community, including very low to moderate income households, seniors and people with a disability,

(c)  ensuring new housing development provides residents with a reasonable level of amenity,

(d)  promoting the planning and delivery of housing in locations where it will make good use of existing and planned infrastructure and services,

(e)  minimising adverse climate and environmental impacts of new housing development,

(f)  reinforcing the importance of designing housing in a way that reflects and enhances its locality,

(g)  supporting short-term rental accommodation as a home-sharing activity and contributor to local economies, while managing the social and environmental impacts from this use,

(h)  mitigating the loss of existing affordable rental housing.

No 8 storey buildings in proximity



State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing) 2021

Current version for 6 February 2026 to date (accessed 5 March 2026 at 14:06)

Chapter 2

Part 1

Section 13


13   Affordable housing—the Act, s 1.4(1)

(1)  In this Policy, a household is taken to be a very low income household, low income household or moderate income household if—

(a)  the household—

(i)  has a gross income within the following ranges of percentages of the median household income for Greater Sydney or the Rest of NSW—

(A)  very low income household—less than 50%,

(B)  low income household—50–less than 80%,

(C)  moderate income household—80–120%, and

(ii)  pays no more than 30% of the gross income in rent, or

(b)  the household—

(i)  is eligible to occupy rental accommodation under the National Rental Affordability Scheme, and

(ii)  pays no more rent than the rent that would be charged if the household were to occupy rental accommodation under the Scheme.

(2)  In this section—

Greater Sydney means the area that the Australian Bureau of Statistics determines from time to time to be the Greater Sydney—Greater Capital City Statistical Area.

National Rental Affordability Scheme has the same meaning as in the National Rental Affordability Scheme Act 2008 of the Commonwealth.

Rest of NSW means the area that the Australian Bureau of Statistics determines from time to time to be the Rest of NSW—Greater Capital City Statistical Area.

15   Requirement for imposition of conditions—the Act, s 7.32(3)(a)

Before imposing a condition under the Act, section 7.32, the consent authority must consider the following—

(a)  affordable housing must aim to create mixed and balanced communities,

(b)  affordable housing must be created and managed so that a socially diverse residential population, representative of all income groups, is developed and maintained in a locality,

(c)  affordable housing must be made available to very low, low and moderate income households, or a combination of the households,

(d)  affordable housing must be rented to appropriately qualified tenants and at an appropriate rate of gross household income,

(e)  land provided for affordable housing must be used for the purposes of the provision of affordable housing,

(f)  buildings provided for affordable housing must be managed to maintain their continued use for affordable housing,

(g)  affordable housing must consist of dwellings constructed to a standard that, in the opinion of the consent authority, is consistent with other dwellings in the area.

8   Housing diversity and social interaction

(1)  Good design achieves a mix of apartment sizes, providing housing choice for different demographics, living needs and household budgets.

(2)  Well designed residential apartment development responds to social context by providing housing and facilities to suit the existing and future social mix.

(3)  Good design involves practical and flexible features, including—

(a)  different types of communal spaces for a broad range of people, and

(b)  opportunities for social interaction among residents.

Objection to Proposed Development – 160 Oxford Street, Paddington

I have been a resident of this area for 35 years and I also run a small design business from my home. I feel very strongly opposed to this proposal.

Paddington is one of Sydney’s most unique and thriving heritage terrace communities. It is a connected, vibrant and highly valued neighbourhood, and one of the main reasons for this is the continued presence of terrace houses and smaller-scale residential buildings that support a genuine local community.

In my local enclave between Greens Road, South Dowling Street and Oxford Street in South Paddington, there are nearly 2,000 residents living within this pocket. This community accommodates a diverse range of people and provides relatively affordable housing in an area that is walkable, connected, warm and caring. People walk around the block with their dogs, children play in the streets, and neighbours talk to each other and look out for one another. It is a safe and genuinely social community.

What is being proposed through this oversized development of high-rise, expensive apartments will erode that sense of community. Of particular concern is the significant net loss of genuinely affordable housing, from 27 existing dwellings to only 10 proposed. The loss of 17 affordable units on the site does not, in my view, justify the 30% Affordable Housing Bonus the developer is claiming.

The heritage character of Paddington will also be greatly impacted by this proposed development. It will erode the social and physical fabric of Paddington’s communities and sit uncomfortably within an area defined by its fine-grain heritage streetscape.

My key objections are as follows:

Loss of affordable housing
The proposal results in a substantial reduction in existing affordable dwellings, decreasing from 27 units to 10. This is a serious loss of affordable housing in an area where such housing is already under pressure.Iti s contrary to current government planning guidellines

Inappropriate scale, bulk and massing
The size and scale of the proposed building are excessive and out of character with the surrounding area. Unfortunately will also create a precedent for further reckless high-rise developers in the area

The proposal includes minimal setbacks from the Oxford Street boundary and no setback along Shadforth Street. This will create an overbearing built form and further diminish the character and amenity of the surrounding streetscape.

Traffic and congestion impacts
The four basement parking levels servicing 83 cars will have significant negative traffic impacts for local residents and commercial businesses. There is not enough infrastructure to support this

Risk of loss of four London Plane trees on Oxford Street. These trees are of high environmental eco cooling significance as well as their beautiful aesthetic appeal

Overall, I strongly object to this proposal. It is an over-scaled and inappropriate development for this part of Paddington. It will diminish the heritage character of the area, reduce affordable housing, disrupt the existing community, and create unnecessary traffic and environmental impacts.

I urge Council to reject this proposal.

Yours faithfully,
Kathy McKinnon

The size of this development in particular the number of car spaces cannot be accommodated by the small and narrow streets around this site. Regardless of the number of parking spaces there will be extra cars in the area looking for parking which is already over capacity limits. The proposal to demolish the existing low income units for the 15% affordable housing is a joke. This will mean that only wealthy downsizes will be accommodated and in the main these people are not workers. As a business owner in the CBD it is already extremely hard to attract good workers as they are pushed further and further out to the suburbs. Where will all the nurses at SVH live. Help you cannot allow this type of development. Thank you

I strongly object to this development project. The project only provides for 10-12 "affordable" dwellings, which will only be available on a rental basis for a temporary period of 15 years. The existing building, which will be demolished, contains 15 -17 genuinely affordable apartments on the 160 Oxford Street site.
This project will do absolutely nothing to increase the numbers of homes for the average person.
I also object to the project on the basis of the heritage of the surrounding area, the protected historical area of Paddington. A great big ugly tower will be completely incongruous and very damaging to the aesthetics of this precious area of Sydney. There are hardly any places like it left in Sydney.

Paddington is a unique and uniquely vulnerable suburb with deep historical and cultural significance to Sydney, and its residents past, present and future.
As the world's largest complete piece of Victorian terraced housing, it is not only an important piece of urban architecture that tells the story of Sydney from colonialism to modernity, but a valuable and irreplaceable tourism asset to the entire city of Sydney. It is a place thousands of people visit daily to see a charming piece of old Sydney that continues to live, breathe and thrive.
It is also home to thousands of people who share a cohesive inner-city lifestyle and vision focused on community, shared, high-density living and heritage.
The 160 Oxford St project is a violation of everything that the suburb of Paddington represents. It is oversized, ugly, gross and completely out of character with the neighbourhood. The fact it is designed to sit in the oldest and most characterful part of Paddington, full of tiny preserved cottages and little unique dwellings, is an abomination.
Nobody believes the rhetoric about this project's attempts at "affordable housing" or" meeting housing supply". These tokenistic declarations are inevitably spurious - these apartments will be bought by wealthy people for their harbour views and prime location. This is a craven profit-driven exercise designed to ruthlessly exploit the current slack and expedient planning laws of this government.
The worst thing about developments like this in beautiful neighbourhoods is that once there, they become an immovable blight on the landscape. Oversized, unsightly and unnecessary, they overshadow the character underneath.
The stupidest part of this is that heritage neighbourhoods are a non-renewable resource. They should be preserved not only for historical purposes but for the massive tourism and marketing opportunities they represent. Neighbourhoods like Paddington, and indeed especially Paddington, hold a great deal of interest for tourists and visitors and should be maintained and promoted as major drawcards for the city. They are part of its unique fabric, its look, its feel, its history, its story, its imagination, its living culture, its future. Allowing blights like this to tear away at the character is nothing but a short-term punishment that ends up a long-term problem.
This is not an objection based on NIMBYism. It is based on the reality that sometimes some things are worth holding dear, and preserving, not for the select group of residents who currently live there but for the city as a whole, and its people, now and in the future.
This development will add nothing to the suburb but significantly affect it. I cannot object to this project more strenuously.