Melrose Park Gateway

The development will add to the current congestion in the area, especially in line with the already approved development at Melrose, including the towers on Atkins Rd and Hughes Avenue. There appears to be insufficient parking included in the plans for the dwellings, as well as a licensed premises.
The licensed hotel is not in keeping with the local area with insufficient public transport and a location that is too close to both the current Primary school and the High School that is due to open in 2027.

I OBJECT TO BOTH THE CONCURRENT REZONING PROPOSAL AND STATE SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR THE REASONS DETAILED IN THE ATTACHED SUBMISSION

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on SSD-84348959. Please see the attached response alongside Growth Data Form and DA information sheet for the applicant.

P. Pritchard
21 Atkins Rd
Ermington NSW 2115
20th October 2025

OBJECTION TO SSD: Melrose Park Gateway (SSD-84348959)
19 Hope Street Melrose Park and 69, 71, 73, 75, 77 Hughes Avenue Ermington

As a property owner and member of the local community I strongly object to the Melrose Park Gateway (SSD-84348959) primarily because of the inclusion of a hotel as a major component of the design. The proposed pub is in close proximity to the co-living and affordable housing residences and I believe this will have a negative impact on the occupants of these buildings and the community as a whole. At this crucial stage of decision making, I call upon those responsible to plan for our community’s future well-being and to acknowledge the burden that this hotel would place on the residents of Melrose Park.

The NSW State Government Gamble Aware website states:

“Gaming machines in NSW are designed to make a profit for the venues licensed to operate them…The lights and noise help create excitement to keep you gambling even if you're losing…
We can tell you right now they’re designed to take your money.”
NSW State Government acknowledges the gambling industry’s profits flow directly from hotel patrons to the licensee. It is therefore unconscionable for this State Significant Project to be approved in its current state. Architectural Plans, EIS, App 5, show the proposed pub to be located within the same building as the co-living residences and adjacent to the affordable housing tower. The hotel covers two storeys and a significant amount of its lower floor space would be devoted to poker machines and a sports betting station. At this time of housing insecurity, why have two storeys of floor space been gifted to a pub and gambling location which is designed to take profits from vulnerable members of our society?

In a letter from Michael Woodland (Keylan) on behalf of PAYCE he assures the Secretary Kiersten Fishburn (Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure) that the project, will deliver, “significant public benefits to the community,” (Request for Industry specific SEARs p.8). However, I reject the assertion that any public benefit would result from the inclusion of a pub in this location. If a cafe or restaurant, community centre or library were included in the plan, this would be an admirable addition to a new neighbourhood. Such examples of third spaces would build community and social cohesion. In contrast, Architectural Plans, p. 9 show gambling stations (with a one-person per machine layout) that can only function to isolate individuals and reduce community engagement.

I direct this letter to those who have the power to make decisions that will affect individuals and communities for years to come. I urge you to revise the plans of the Melrose Park Gateway, refusing to include a pub in this location and replacing it with either more housing or alternative ‘third spaces’ for the benefit of the community as a whole.

Yours faithfully,

P. Pritchard

With reference to the above project, we are providing comments and objections.
1. The TIA states "The site is not located on a major on-road (bus) public transport corridor nor is it adjacent to a major road. Therefore, future construction of the development is not forecast to cause significant disruptions to
public transport, pedestrians, cyclists or general road users." - given the current SIGNIFICANT impact on local traffic with the current construction this develop will make it even more difficult to travel around the community. To claim it will not impact traffic, is not based on reality, and on current our day-to-day experience. 
2. TIA, Page 17, may state parking ratios in accordance with guidelines but in reality, they are totally inadequate. Even with the limited site occupancy closer to Victoria road our neighbourhood struggles with parking and traffic management (e.g. try getting onto Victoria Road during peak hour or Saturday lunch time, it takes an unacceptably long time) - even not including the additional strain caused by current construction tradie parking which is already out of hand. This will only be exasperated by increasing the height of the towers. Similarly on Page 33, the retail parking is totally inadequate.
3. The Noise assessment report is not based on practical reality. The current construction noise, truck noise and the associated increased traffic noise is excessive for such a quiet neighbourhood. And the site pays no attention to the noise restrictions and continues, for example, to operate power equipment after hours and on Sunday mornings. The situation will only get worse if this development goes ahead as proposed. 
4. The broader site has proposed building a High School (corner of Hope Street and Wharf Road). If the High School is going ahead then a Pub in the facility is just not acceptable. In addition, it is a family neighbourhood with children and adding a Pub, and the social and noise issues it may bring, is just not acceptable. And the proposed operating hours are extreme for such a local community. 
Other general issues:
(a) Increasing the height of the towers is not in character with the "emerging character of the development with the Melrose Park". It is a forced "emerging character" on a family orientated community. The towers as originally proposed are already too high.
(b) There seems to be no plans to improve the road infrastructure for the area which is already under strain with the increase in townhouse/dual occupancy development in the area.  

Subject: Formal Objection to Melrose Park Gateway Development (SSD-84348959)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Melrose Park Gateway development
(SSD-84348959), currently on exhibition for public comment. I appreciate the opportunity
to provide feedback and wish to express my concerns regarding the legal implications
and the potential adverse impact this development may have on the surrounding suburb.

Objection Summary
I object to the proposal on the following grounds:

1- Excessive Building Height and Density
The proposed amendment to increase the building height from 48m to 64m and the
Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 2.67:1 to 3.75:1 represents a significant intensification of
development. This scale is inconsistent with the existing character of Melrose Park and
Ermington and risks overwhelming local infrastructure, reducing sunlight access, and
increasing wind and shadow impacts on nearby residences.
The simple urban fabric of the neighbourhood cannot accommodate such an enormous
concentration of construction in a single spot. The addition of four towers, along with the
bulky and unattractive shopping centre and the massive buildings above it, will turn the
area into a concrete jungle with a new project.

2- Inadequate Parking and Traffic Impact
The development proposes only 155 car parking spaces for a mixed-use complex that
includes 197 affordable housing units, 154 co-living units, and a licensed hotel. This is
insufficient and will likely result in overflow parking in surrounding residential streets.
Moreover, the proposal does not include publicly available traffic impact data. Given the
scale of the development, it is reasonable to expect a substantial increase in vehicle
movements, particularly during peak hours. This may lead to:
* Increased congestion on Hope Street and Hughes Avenue.
* Pressure on intersections and local road networks.
* Reduced pedestrian safety and walkability.
* Strain on public transport services without corresponding upgrades.
The absence of a detailed traffic impact assessment raises serious concerns about the
adequacy of planning and mitigation measures as the document does not contain any
traffic modeling, vehicle trip generation data, or intersection analysis.

3- Impact on Community Cohesion and Services
The inclusion of co-living units and a hotel may introduce transient populations, which
could affect community cohesion and place additional strain on local services such as
waste management, public transport, and emergency services. The proposal lacks
clarity on how these impacts will be mitigated.
The area completely lacks urban squares or open spaces that could support gatherings
or the movement of the large groups of people that will result from this over
development. Moreover, the proposed landscaping in the developer’s submission is
limited to the area beneath the high-voltage transmission lines — a space no one will
use due to concerns about radiation exposure.

4- Health, Safety, Environmental and Amenity Concerns
The demolition of existing structures and construction of high-rise towers will contribute
to noise, dust, and disruption during the build phase. Post-construction, the urban heat
island effect and reduced privacy for adjacent properties are serious concerns. The
proposed public park (2,561 sqm) is a positive gesture but does not sufficiently offset the
scale of the development.

The existing infrastructure — roads, sidewalks, utilities and underground services — is
not equipped to handle developments of this magnitude.
Residents of the four new towers will be at serious health risk, including potential
illnesses and cancers, due to their proximity to Sydney’s largest high-voltage power line,
especially those living in units closest to the line.

5- Legal and Planning Integrity
The concurrent rezoning proposal undermines the integrity of the Parramatta Local
Environmental Plan 2023. Allowing such significant changes through a State Significant
Development pathway may set a precedent for bypassing local planning controls and
community consultation.
Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department reject the
current proposal or require substantial revisions to reduce its scale, improve
infrastructure planning, and ensure alignment with community expectations and local
planning instruments.

I confirm that I have not made any reportable political donations in the past two years
related to this submission.

Thank you for considering my objection.
Yours sincerely,

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed Melrose Park Gateway development
(SSD-84348959), currently on exhibition for public comment. I appreciate the opportunity
to provide feedback and wish to express my concerns regarding the legal implications
and the potential adverse impact this development may have on the surrounding suburb.

Objection Summary
I object to the proposal on the following grounds:

1- Excessive Building Height and Density
The proposed amendment to increase the building height from 48m to 64m and the
Floor Space Ratio (FSR) from 2.67:1 to 3.75:1 represents a significant intensification of
development. This scale is inconsistent with the existing character of Melrose Park and
Ermington and risks overwhelming local infrastructure, reducing sunlight access, and
increasing wind and shadow impacts on nearby residences.
The simple urban fabric of the neighbourhood cannot accommodate such an enormous
concentration of construction in a single spot. The addition of four towers, along with the
bulky and unattractive shopping centre and the massive buildings above it, will turn the
area into a concrete jungle with a new project.

2- Inadequate Parking and Traffic Impact
The development proposes only 155 car parking spaces for a mixed-use complex that
includes 197 affordable housing units, 154 co-living units, and a licensed hotel. This is
insufficient and will likely result in overflow parking in surrounding residential streets.
Moreover, the proposal does not include publicly available traffic impact data. Given the
scale of the development, it is reasonable to expect a substantial increase in vehicle
movements, particularly during peak hours. This may lead to:
* Increased congestion on Hope Street and Hughes Avenue.
* Pressure on intersections and local road networks.
* Reduced pedestrian safety and walkability.
* Strain on public transport services without corresponding upgrades.
The absence of a detailed traffic impact assessment raises serious concerns about the
adequacy of planning and mitigation measures as the document does not contain any
traffic modeling, vehicle trip generation data, or intersection analysis.

3- Impact on Community Cohesion and Services
The inclusion of co-living units and a hotel may introduce transient populations, which
could affect community cohesion and place additional strain on local services such as
waste management, public transport, and emergency services. The proposal lacks
clarity on how these impacts will be mitigated.
The area completely lacks urban squares or open spaces that could support gatherings
or the movement of the large groups of people that will result from this over
development. Moreover, the proposed landscaping in the developer’s submission is
limited to the area beneath the high-voltage transmission lines — a space no one will
use due to concerns about radiation exposure.

4- Health, Safety, Environmental and Amenity Concerns
The demolition of existing structures and construction of high-rise towers will contribute
to noise, dust, and disruption during the build phase. Post-construction, the urban heat
island effect and reduced privacy for adjacent properties are serious concerns. The
proposed public park (2,561 sqm) is a positive gesture but does not sufficiently offset the
scale of the development.
The existing infrastructure — roads, sidewalks, utilities and underground services — is
not equipped to handle developments of this magnitude.
Residents of the four new towers will be at serious health risk, including potential
illnesses and cancers, due to their proximity to Sydney’s largest high-voltage power line,
especially those living in units closest to the line.

5- Legal and Planning Integrity
The concurrent rezoning proposal undermines the integrity of the Parramatta Local
Environmental Plan 2023. Allowing such significant changes through a State Significant
Development pathway may set a precedent for bypassing local planning controls and
community consultation.
Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the Department reject the
current proposal or require substantial revisions to reduce its scale, improve
infrastructure planning, and ensure alignment with community expectations and local
planning instruments.

Thank you for considering my objection.

Yours sincerely,

The Melrose Gateway Project on Hope Street has been causing numerous issues on the surrounding roads:

Damaged roads – There are potholes and surface damage near the end of Hope Street.

Blocked parking spaces – Large construction materials frequently occupy public parking spots, which appear to be reserved for construction use.

As a result, other vehicles are forced to park on nearby streets, such as ours and Hughes Avenue, due to the lack of available spots on Hope Street.

Frequent and lengthy delays – Large trucks and smaller construction vehicles often block the road when entering or exiting the site.

Pedestrian access issues – When footpaths are blocked, no alternative safe and accessible route is provided for pedestrians.

Littering – The project is generating excessive food waste and rubbish left on the ground.

Safety concerns – The area is unsafe for children walking to and from school, as construction materials are often left on the road and pathways.

Noise and pollution – The site is consistently creating high levels of noise and environmental pollution.

I support the project, makes sense in terms of what will be built here in future, and there seems to be an abundance of infrastructure, parks (massive reserve to the south), Carlingford station is 800m away, seems to have a few sports fields, a high school. I use to live in Olympic park and one of my favourite things was the access to the green space in bicentennial park, which I can see this development offering similar access to others with the reserve.

The current zoning should be left in place for this with no rezoning allowed.
A licensed hotel should be in another location of the development site - such as wharf road or victoria road. This is due to the location being a direct path taken by small school children and there is a child's park directly opposie in Hughes Avenue. There is a duty of care to not have a hotel near vulnerable community members and children. With the new High School and Primary School going oon within 300m this is an appropriate location.
There is already going to be an issue with parking and traffic in Hughes Avenue - which is already feeling the impact of going from a quiet suburban street to having 6000 units go up directly next door. Adding to this with larger rezoning and a hotel is not appropriuate or viable for this location. There is no reason that the hotel cannot be in another part of the development that would be a better location and more accessiable without such a large impact on the current local residents.
This building would also mean that natural light would be significantly decreased with lawns, trees and plants not being able to thrive and local residence of Hughes Ave significanlty impacted.
To clarify, I strongly object to the proposed development and change proposed. The site is in close vicinity to 2 schools and within a residential area, which makes it an inappropriate location for such a venue. My concerns include increased traffic and parking issues, risks to child safety, noise disturbance, and the likelihood of alcohol-related antisocial behaviour. This development would significantly impact the amenity and safety of our neighbourhood and is not consistent with the character of a family-oriented community.
Key Concerns
Proximity to a Primary School
Increased exposure of children to alcohol-related activities.
Potential safety risks from intoxicated patrons near school grounds.
Negative role-modelling impacts on young children.
Public Safety and Amenity
Risk of increased antisocial behaviour (noise, violence, vandalism, loitering).
Increased traffic and pedestrian safety concerns, particularly at school pick-up/drop-off times.
Concerns about late-night noise disturbing residents’ quiet enjoyment of their homes.
Traffic, Parking, and Infrastructure Strain
Added traffic congestion on local streets not designed for high vehicle turnover.
Inadequate parking provision, leading to overflow onto residential streets.
Potential conflict between pub patrons and families walking to/from school.
Character of the Neighbourhood
A Hotel is not be in keeping with the character of a primarily residential/family-oriented area.
Reduction in property values due to increased noise, antisocial behaviour, or safety concerns.
Health and Social Impact
Studies linking increased alcohol outlet density with higher rates of alcohol-related harm.
Concerns about increased availability of alcohol near vulnerable populations, including children and young people.

Overcrowding of the area. Negative impact local infrastructure and property values. Increased strain on local buses