Proposed Mascot social housing redevelopment delayed

A planning proposal to redevelop social housing in Mascot has been delayed, with council deferring their decision on the project well into the next financial year.

The project – on the corner of Botany Road and Coward Street – would see the 26 dwellings on the site be replaced with 152, 45 of which would be social housing.

Most controversially, the proposal calls to double the building height limit to 28m, although the amount of floor space would remain unchanged.

“Doubling that (the building height limits), in my personal view, is extreme,” said Bayside Mayor Christina Curry, during a City and Environment Committee meeting last week.

Planning consultant for NSW Land and Housing Corporation (LAHC), Michael File, pleaded with council to consider progressing the proposal after five years of consultation with them.

“We have heard a lot in the media about the housing crisis and the calls for social housing and more private housing. This, in my opinion, is a prime site for redevelopment, if not now, when?” File said in the meeting.

“We are seeking a council decision to progress this site concurrently with the master planning in order to facilitate a much-needed supply of social and affordable housing.”

While the number of new dwellings has been outlined in the proposal, File added that LAHC’s goal is to “provide as much social housing as reasonably possible,” noting that the new government may alter the 70 per cent private, 30 per cent public split that has defined much high-rise residential development across Sydney in recent years.

“We could get a doubling of existing dwellings, and a significant supply of private dwellings on it,” said File.

Forecasting a review of zoning in the wider area, council reasoned that a more holistic approach is needed.

“It’s not an issue of the site having potential, we recognise that [it does],” said council staff member and Director City Futures, Peter Barber, at the meeting.

“It’s really a matter of timing, and we would say the doubling of height limit on a site ahead of a more comprehensive view of the area is probably not the right way to go about planning.”

Council has also raised issues about the proposal, including “heritage impacts, traffic and access, urban design, impacts on adjoining properties and the streetscape”.

“We would rather look at the entire area that council has identified and approach it in a more holistic way,” said Barber, anticipating a review of development regulation in the area in the next financial year.

Mayor Curry did not respond to a request for comment.