To Whom It May Concern

I wish to voice my objection to the proposed development at 160 Oxford St, Paddington, NSW 2021 (Application No.SSD-97528708) on the following grounds:

The scale of this building is at odds with the existing buildings surrounding it. It will have a strong and unsightly visual impact, jarring with its well preserved and iconic heritage environment.
The proposed building will add significantly to congestion in the narrow streets surrounding it, bith during and after the construction process.
Adding car parks to buildings in an area like this only attracts more traffic and goes against the current wisdom aimed at reducing the number of cars in high-density neighbourhoods. This area is extremely well catered-for with buses, car-share schemes, soon-to-be bike lanes and is very pedestrian-friendly.
The proposed building will open the door for further inappropriate development in the area and lead quickly to the “creep” of such developments. This will have an irreparable impact on the character of the wider area, which is internationally recognised and is of huge social and historic value.
The proposed building will cause the demolition of 27 already existing affordable housing units and the forced displacement of their residents, many of whom are essential workers and students.

The alleged “affordable housing” being promoted by the developers of the new building is utterly disingenuous as it is only guaranteed affordable for 15 years, after which it can and will be sold publicly for vastly greater profit. From that point on the affordable housing component will no longer exist.

I urge the relevant authority to reject this inappropriate proposal and protect the area’s character and liveability for which this part of Sydney is famous.

Your sincerely

Phoebe Vincent
Paddington St, Paddington

To the Planning Assessment Team,

I would like to register my support for the redevelopment of the site at 142–160 Oxford Street in Paddington.

Inner-city suburbs like Paddington offer some of the best access to employment, public transport, restaurants, shops and community facilities in Sydney. It makes sense that additional housing should be located in areas where residents can take advantage of these existing amenities.

The proposal appears to replace a number of older buildings that currently detract from the heritage conservation area with a cohesive and well-designed residential development. Improvements like this can significantly enhance the overall character of a street.

I am also pleased to see the inclusion of affordable housing as part of the project. Sydney has become increasingly expensive, and developments that provide housing opportunities for people on a range of incomes are incredibly valuable.

From what I understand, the building design has been developed with care and sensitivity to the surrounding architecture. This kind of thoughtful approach ensures that new developments contribute positively to established neighbourhoods.

For these reasons, I believe the redevelopment will be a strong addition to Oxford Street and the broader Paddington community.

Sincerely,
Alice Tsai

To Victor Casasanta

Planning Officer

Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure



Dear Planning Officer,

I am writing to express my support for the redevelopment proposed at 142–160 Oxford Street in Paddington.

As a parent living in Sydney, I see firsthand how difficult it has become for families and young people to find housing close to schools, employment and essential services. Projects that introduce additional housing in established areas are extremely important for the future of the city.

Paddington is already a highly connected suburb with access to transport, schools, parks and retail areas. Increasing housing supply in such locations allows people to live closer to the services they rely on daily.

The proposed redevelopment also appears to significantly improve the architectural quality of the site. The existing buildings seem dated and do not make a positive contribution to the heritage conservation area. Replacing them with a carefully designed building that references the character of Paddington will enhance the streetscape.

The inclusion of affordable housing is also very encouraging. Families and individuals who work in nearby schools, hospitals and businesses should have the opportunity to live within the communities they support.

Overall, I believe the project represents a sensible and positive redevelopment of the site.

Kind regards,

Christian Paneras

It's in a great spot, good links to the city and the rest of the eastern suburbs, and in a place where there is high demand for new housing. I say build it, we're in a housing crisis and this looks like a wonderful place to live and it will surely ease up the pressure that is building elsewhere by giving people better options on where to live.

I suppor this project proceeding, refer to attached letter.

While it is not ideal that lower cost housing is being replaced, there is no shortage of available evidence that building more housing results in additional housing at all levels of the housing market. And this development does offer substantially more bedroom and floor space than the existing development.

Were it not for Woollahra council and City of Sydney blocking almost all new housing in Paddington for 50 years, perhaps this wouldn't be necessary. But in the midst of a generational housing crisis, approving this development is the right thing to do. It is frankly absurd that in one of the best located and connected parts of Sydney this project should be controversial. If anything, it should be permitted to be far higher.

For examples of moving chains and their effects on the housing market.
JUE Insight: City-wide effects of new housing supply: Evidence from moving chains (at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119022001048)
The Downmarket Impact of New Multifamily Housing: Evidence from a Honolulu Condo Tower (at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5780364)
More homes, better cities by the Grattan Institute.

I do not have time to write a detailed submission, but don't want to let the opportunity pass to object to this project.
I am in support of affordable housing and also believe we have to increase the density in sympathetic areas. I do not believe this development in terms of its height and bulk are at all appropriate for this historical area.
As residents we have to pay a fortune to renovate our terraces and are severely restricted due to conservation areas and laneways, even if they are low value due to old 1950s and 1970 unit blocks. It is not appropriate that new developments like these are put forward which further destroy the integrity of this unique area.
In addition to be too high (14 levels) and bulky, the building is not designed to speak to terraces and other historic buildings. It would be much better placed in another suburb such as Bondi. After this development goes through others will follow and destroy the fabric of the area. Developers often promise affordable housing for the short-term but it is just to get their development through, which they then sell and walk away from. Selling the affordable housing component when allowed.
I understand state government has acted too slowly to build public housing and affordable housing, but madly approving Paddington Towers is not the answer.

I request that a town meeting be held with plenty of notice to enable residents to have their say. Thank you. Please do not let this go ahead!

The project is out of character with its surrounding streets, reduces the number of apartments available, and its affordable housing temporary plan is pointless.
Far too high for all the tiny heritage cottages behind it and cause traffic chaos unless all car access is in/out direct from Oxford St…. A modern monstrosity for the wealthy.

By Australian standards, Sydney City Council is a black hole when it comes to public toilets. A major development precinct needs to incorporate toilets to fix this