Comments made here were sent to City of Sydney. Add your own comment.
What a great proposal! Applications like this will help Sydney solve the housing crisis. I hope council approves this ASAP.
I wish it were a bigger increase in bedrooms. Should be allowed to go higher to achieve that. I live nearby and it's an area very well served by public transport. Boarding house residents are less likely to own cars too, so I don't think it'll have much of a traffic impact considering those two factors. I know I rarely use my car, and if it weren't for underground parking I'd sell the bastard.
Every new unit we build in the city reduces the unsustainable sprawl we've been reliant on. It's good for the climate, it's good for biodiversity, it's good for my housing costs. As I said I wish it went higher to fit more units in, but we'll take what we can get. I support it on the above grounds.
I strongly support this development, with the caveat that it should be much larger. We are in a housing crisis and we need more housing diversity in places like Newtown.
As a young person affected deeply by the affordability crisis in Sydney I strongly support this development as it allows less fortunate people to have access to many amenities/ public transport. It is a step in the right direction to boost public housing stock and alleviate the housing crisis we are facing
This seems like a good development, helping people who can't afford to live in the inner city. We need more of this.
I support this development. It's a rare opportunity to build more places to live so close to so many services and bus routes in addition to being pretty close to a station.
This comment is directed to Homes NSW and is not an objection to the development.
The total development cost is approximately $8M ($1M per 20m² studio or $50,000/m²) when consultant fees and the value of the three sites are included.
Why is the development utilising less than half of the allowable controls? And why is the design so overworked that construction costs exceed $10,000/m²—the same as a luxury architectural home?
Sydney’s prices are undeniably high, but surely this money could be better spent providing far more affordable housing.
I support this proposal for more housing to meet demand, especially for diverse housing like a boarding house - we need more of it to house people. Its near a park, near town and shops, and near enough to the station - a great place to let more people live. It will help renters and people like me by freeing up other housing but priced out of the inner west
I can only support this development if it is guaranteed affordable housing. Many developers spruik their proposals as affordable or boarding house accommodation but once it is completed it becomes holiday rentals or expensive studios. Will the dwellings remain affordable in perpetuity or will they be sold at a profit after a few years?
I would also like Council to consider adaptive reuse - there is a big environmental cost to demolition and rebuilding.
Is Council aware of the Aboriginal heritage of this site? I used to live across the road and am aware that it was home to generations of Indigenous families. Will this be taken into account and will any of the units be reserved for Indigenous tenants needing affordable accommodation?
Initially, my reaction was skeptical—another so-called "low-cost housing plan"? At approximately $1 million per occupant, it hardly seems low-cost. However, upon reading further, it’s clear the tenants will be subsidized by Homes NSW, which makes a significant difference.
I believe constructing a high-quality building like this is appropriate, as it allows marginalized members of the community to reside in what has become an increasingly expensive area.
While the number of occupants (8) seems small relative to the 473m² site, and unlikely to make a significant impact on the broader housing shortage, the design seems fitting given the heritage values of the area and the focus on sole occupants. A development of this size creates an opportunity for a cohesive community, with communal spaces fostering connection. By contrast, a larger number of single occupants might lead to a less cohesive environment.
The building appears to be of high quality, and it’s commendable that Homes NSW has appointed a local architect who is likely to understand the values and character of the area.
Yeah after reading all 300+pages of reports this is a good idea but bad execution. The zoning is residential and the best way forward is to get the area re-zoned to high density so that they can go more than eight apartments and also the surrounding properties can go high occupancy as well. Single occupant dwellings are circa 2010 and we should have 1 person per unit 2 sqm with access to food and water and internet
