By JUDITH PEARSON from Mosman Matters

A new State Significant Development (SSD) proposal for 40–48 Redan Street, Mosman is now on public exhibition until 30 March 2026.

The proposal seeks approval to demolish the existing dwellings and replace them with a 10-storey high-rise building comprising 53 apartments, including two basement levels with parking for 106 cars.

This is a very large development in a low-rise residential street, and it is being advanced through the in fill affordable housing SSD pathway. It is also important to note that the development is linked to Time & Place, the developer backed by James Packer.

What is wrong with this proposal

Redan Street is characterised by lower scale residential development, heritage homes, landscaped setbacks and a fine grain streetscape. Against that backdrop, a 10-storey building represents an extraordinary escalation in height, bulk and intensity.

The proposal also sits directly next to heritage listed properties at 36 and 38 Redan Street, meaning the impacts are not limited to one site. The setting of these heritage homes, and the character of the street as a whole, would be fundamentally altered.

The proposal requires deep excavation into sandstone, introduces a very large basement structure, intensifies vehicle activity, and places substantial built form within a Scenic Protection Area. Taken together, these are not minor planning issues. They go to the heart of whether this site is suitable for a development of this scale.

Although the project includes 11 affordable housing apartments, the overall outcome remains overwhelmingly a luxury market apartment scheme.

As shown in the marked-up image above, the “affordable” component consists of 8 bedsits along Redan Lane and 3 larger “executive affordable” units. These units are arranged with separate access from the laneway, distinct from the main building entrance, which raises concerns about a “poor door” style arrangement and whether the development supports inclusive and integrated living.

Residents are entitled to ask whether the affordable housing component, which is only required for 15 years, is genuinely driving a balanced planning outcome, or whether it is primarily being used to unlock the SSD pathway and justify a level of development that would otherwise be unacceptable.

Point you may wish to include in your submission

It is important that you write in your own words for your submission to be counted. Common concerns raised in the planning documents and supporting material include:

• Excessive height and bulk
The proposal is for a 10-storey building, which is clearly out of scale with the surrounding low rise context.

• Overdevelopment and structural risk
The development requires excavation of up to 10 metres into sandstone, extending to site boundaries. This creates real risks of ground movement, vibration and damage to neighbouring properties. The site is being engineered to accommodate the building, rather than the building responding to the site.

• Heritage impacts
The site adjoins heritage listed properties at 36 and 38 Redan Street. The proposal would overwhelm these heritage items, disrupt their visual setting and erode the existing character of Redan Street.

• Scenic Protection Area conflict
The site is affected by a Scenic Protection Area, where planning objectives include limiting visual intrusion and protecting landscape character. A 10-storey building is difficult to reconcile with those objectives.

• Traffic and access concerns
Safety concerns arise from the use of Redan Lane, which is only a little over 4 metres wide, has no footpaths, and is not designed for increased service and waste vehicle activity. The introduction of larger vehicles into such a constrained space raises clear safety and access issues.

• Lack of supporting infrastructure
There are growing concerns that infrastructure is not keeping pace with the scale of development being proposed. Mosman currently operates with a single fire station and limited emergency services capacity. A significant increase in population, combined with the introduction of 10-storey buildings, raises practical questions about emergency response, access for large fire vehicles, and overall service capacity in narrow residential streets.

• Non compliance and misleading claims
The proposal exceeds height controls and requires a Clause 4.6 variation, yet is described as “compliant”. A development that breaches fundamental controls should not be presented as compliant.

• Affordable housing design and “poor door” access concerns
The proposal includes 11 affordable housing units with separate access from the laneway, which raises concerns about a “poor door” style arrangement and whether the design supports inclusive housing.

How to make a submission

We urge you to make a submission objecting to this development before 30 March 2026.

Even a short submission matters. The number of community objections helps demonstrate the level of concern, and it also gives you the right of appeal.

Submissions must be made online through the NSW Planning Portal:

https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/residential-development-fill-affordable-housing-40-48-redan-street-mosman

Please note that you will need to be logged in before clicking the link above. If you don’t already have an account, please select ‘Create account’ to register.

Why it is important to object

This proposal is not just about one development.

You may recall the broader “vision” presented for Mosman by Time & Place a few months ago.

That vision points to large scale redevelopment across substantial parts of Mosman. This is why it is so important to object now.

Each time a proposal of this scale is allowed to proceed, it becomes easier for the next one to follow. Each approval sets a precedent. Each exception shifts expectations of what Mosman will become.

If we do not speak up now, this may be remembered as the beginning of a much broader erosion of Mosman’s village character and heritage.

Disclaimer: This is a paid editorial. The views, opinions and calls to action expressed in this article are those of Mosman Matters, who commissioned, wrote and funded this content. They do not represent the independent editorial position of Mosman Collective.