Heritage concerns clash with development plans in Mosman and Neutral Bay
Plans to raze century-old homes to make way for high-rise housing projects in Sydney’s sought-after suburbs have been halted by heritage protection orders, blocking construction for at least six months.
The NSW government has approved separate requests by Mosman and North Sydney councils to impose a protection order on the 106-year-old double-storey bungalow overlooking Balmoral Beach on Almora Street in Mosman and six more Federation-era workers’ cottages on Bydown Street in Neutral Bay.
The orders come amid a housing supply crisis that has triggered statewide planning reforms aimed at making it easier to develop apartment blocks in established suburbs as part of the Minns government’s efforts to meet the Housing Deal target of 377,000 homes in NSW by July 2029.
Both the Mosman and Neutral Bay development proposals have faced significant opposition from the community. The planned $50.5 million, eight-storey Almora Street proposal has prompted more than 200 written objections from area residents, while 547 people have put their names to a petition calling for the eight-storey Neutral Bay housing development to be halted.
Under heritage protection orders, developers will be prevented from starting any demolition or construction work for at least six months to give councils more time to consider whether longer-term protections are warranted.
Both bids were deemed rejected by the councils, causing the contractors to appeal to the Land and Environment Court and obtain approval for construction work to begin.
Delays could add nine months and more than $250,000 to the process, said Ross Norton, project director for CPDM, the developer of the Neutral Bay residential tower.
“My view is that the council is disappointed with the development and is trying to find any mechanism to stop it and this is another battle we have to fight which will unfortunately increase the cost of delivering the project,” he said.
“Both the provincial and federal governments are actively encouraging developments to address housing supply challenges in well-located areas such as Neutral Bay, and we believe this project will help meet this challenge.
“The whole fabric of Sydney is changing and we are not convinced that the application for a heritage order in this case is genuine. We must accept that our society is changing and the housing response to these demands must change too.”
Council records show that neither the Mosman nor the Neutral Bay development were heritage listed when the development plans were submitted; This fuels the debate about whether existing properties are worth preserving.
Submissions submitted by residents in response to Mosman’s housing proposal highlighted numerous concerns about the project, including fears that the eight-storey tower could alter the character of the low-rise established streetscape.
Mosman resident Judith Pearson, who has launched a crowd-funded Land and Environment campaign against the NSW government’s low and mid-rise housing reforms, argued in a submission that the project could “overwhelm heritage views”, overshadow adjacent homes and “intrude on views” that local planning laws are designed to protect.
These concerns were echoed by resident Jill L’Estrange, a member of the Mosman Headland Preservation Group, who believes the 1920 interwar residence is worth preserving.
“Once you raze heritage it’s gone forever, and while more housing is needed in Sydney, it shouldn’t be at the expense of what makes our streetscapes attractive in the first place,” he said.
Tim Foote, a former real estate agent who serves as managing director of Prosker, the developer behind the Mosman tower, said the proposal was introduced in line with NSW planning reforms aimed at increasing housing density close to city centers and public transport.
While he declined to comment on the heritage preservation order, he said the project was designed to offer more housing options – particularly for “downsizers” – in an area of Sydney where apartments are at a premium.
“People often look at Mosman from a cookie-cutter perspective and say that building new apartments is not going to solve the affordability problem. And while that’s true to a degree, if you create more supply it allows people in larger homes to downsize, which then frees up those properties, which eliminates the affordability challenges that Sydney is experiencing,” he said.
North Sydney Council said in a statement that an independent report into properties on Bydown Street “showed there was sufficient basis” to request a heritage protection order, adding that “the council has a responsibility to secure development proposals”. [are] Sensitive to the public interest, including potential heritage values”.
In a statement, Mosman Council said: “Although the building on Almora Street has not previously been identified as heritage significant by the council, it was flagged as potentially significant by a heritage expert during the development assessment process.”
Heritage protection orders will remain in place for the Neutral Bay area for six months, while the order in Mosman will remain in force until October 30.
NSW Planning Minister Paul Scully has previously warned councils should not use heritage as an excuse to avoid their housing responsibilities amid a supply crisis.
Interim succession orders were also implemented in other Sydney suburbs last year, including properties in Chatswood, Earlwood, Rockdale and Willoughby.
Beginning the featuring a roundup of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
David Barwell is urban affairs correspondent for The Sydney Morning Herald.Connect via email.
