A new frontline has opened up in the battle over the future of Sydney’s historic Victoria Barracks with some advocates for radical development seeking solutions to the city’s housing crisis while those promoting heritage preservation want to keep houses out of any future plans.

As the Defence department moves to sell off 13 under-used NSW sites – including the 15-hectare, 1840s Commonwealth Heritage Listed barracks in Paddington – a clear divide has emerged over what should happen next.

City of Sydney Labor councillor Zann Maxwell has been the most vocal advocate for converting the barracks into what he calls “Sydney’s next great public place” with housing integrated into the site.

He commissioned concept plans from architecture firm Cottee Parker and visualisation studio Arterra Interactive, envisaging the parade ground as public open space surrounded by adaptive reuse of heritage buildings for civic, cultural and commercial purposes – plus new affordable and key worker housing.

Maxwell argues the site is too important to leave idle during a housing crisis, given its proximity to jobs and public transport. He has pushed for the City of Sydney to draft a master plan to guide the site’s future use, and frames the concept images as a way to move the conversation forward.

Greens councillor Sylvie Ellsmore has gone even further, expressing enthusiasm for expanding into other Defence sites such as Garden Island. She visited a redeveloped barracks in Paris and cited it as a model – though heritage advocates have challenged that comparison, noting the Paris site was only two hectares, a fraction of Victoria Barracks’ 15 hectares.

The Committee for Sydney think tank has also backed the idea of renewal, with chief executive Eamon Waterford describing the site as a major opportunity for the city. He argues any residential component should prioritise social and affordable housing, alongside cultural and performance spaces, and that the scale of the site means it could accommodate multiple uses.

Liberal councillor Lyndon Gannon, while cautious about premature master planning, supports opening the site to the community and breathing new life into it, saying the spaces are no longer fit for their current purpose.

Anti-housing

Heritage advocate Linda Bergin, founder of the Headland Preservation Group, has led the case against any housing at Victoria Barracks. Writing in the Sydney Morning Herald in August 2025, she argued the entire site is Commonwealth Heritage Listed and that infilling it with affordable housing would destroy a rare intact colonial military precinct without meaningfully addressing Sydney’s housing shortage.

Bergin wants the site transferred to the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust if Defence vacates, noting the Trust has 25 years’ experience managing historic military sites, cannot sell land under its Act, and operates under heritage protections stronger than any NSW legislation. She also pointed out that the City of Sydney’s own council resolution contained a factual error, claiming only 30–50 per cent of the site was heritage-protected when in fact the entire barracks is listed.

Former Prime Minister Paul Keating has weighed in against the sale, arguing Defence has no right to sell off nationally significant sites. The National Trust has taken a similar position, advocating for Defence to retain ownership and describing Victoria Barracks as one of Australia’s most significant heritage precincts.

Lord Mayor Clover Moore has acknowledged the site’s heritage importance in detail, though she has stopped short of explicitly opposing housing. Her deputy, Jess Miller, has been more pointed in her scepticism – not about heritage per se, but about the council spending resources on master planning for a site that’s being sold by the federal government to an unknown buyer.

A question of precedent

Both sides invoke history. Bergin draws a direct parallel with the 1990s, when Defence tried to sell off harbour military sites for housing. That effort was defeated by a bipartisan coalition including John Howard and Bob Carr, leading to the creation of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust. She argues the same principle should apply now.

Maxwell and his supporters see a different priority– one where a walled-off military compound is opened up and woven back into the urban fabric, with housing as part of a broader public benefit. The debate is likely to intensify as Defence’s divestment process moves forward.