Mixed Use at 14-16 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest

I live on the northern side of Fairmont Avenue, Norwest, immediately south-east of the site. My home is one of four the applicant singled out for detailed solar testing, and it falls within the most-affected noise receiver group (R1, 39–47 Fairmont Avenue). I object to both the concurrent rezoning and the development application. My detailed submission is attached. In summary:

1. The rezoning lacks strategic merit. The Hills Shire Council says residential use on this employment land is "entirely inconsistent" with state and local strategic planning.

2. The site-specific DCP (Part D Section 25), adopted to protect the Fairmont Avenue interface, is disregarded. It limits the eastern part of the site to 6 storeys and requires neighbouring homes to keep at least 4 hours of mid-winter sun. The proposal puts a 25-storey tower there and cuts our sun to 2 hours. The applicant's own Design Report records this control as "Not compliant".

3. Overshadowing more than doubles compared with the approved scheme all year round, not only in mid-winter: +118% to +204% at every hour on 21 June, up to +258% at the March and September equinoxes, and up to +194% in December. The largest increases fall in the afternoons, on the homes south-east of the tower.

4. The residential tower breaches the 22 m rear setback, coming as close as 17.5 m. Twenty-four levels of south-facing balconies and a rooftop terrace would overlook our homes and gardens.

5. Construction noise at our homes is predicted at 77 dB(A), 25 dB above the management level, for a construction period of about 40 months, with inadequate mitigation.

6. The applicant relies on a hypothetical future redevelopment of Fairmont Avenue to downplay these impacts. Council has already found that this transition is not expected in the short term.

7. In 2021 the Local Planning Panel unanimously rejected a smaller scheme for this site because of its impacts on adjoining homes.

8. Operational noise, traffic and the loss of deep soil and trees would permanently degrade the amenity of our residential street.

9. The application is internally inconsistent, and several supporting studies assess a different scheme, so the impacts have not been reliably assessed.

I ask the Department to refuse the rezoning and the application. Please refer to my attached submission for full details and document references.

A 25 level mixed functional building will bring a massive amount of negative impact on our community and daily life for residents living on Fairmont avenue and surrounding areas. The parking is already too crowded, the building will impact on the housing price, the pollution, fire risk and noise pollution will increase!
I strongly object the building is rising up from the previous plan (6-10 floors).
Please take the life of the residents around seriously in the approval process of this plan.

Many thanks

To the Planning Assessment Commission,

I lodge my formal objection to the proposed higher-rise mixed-use development at 14–16 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest. I am a local resident whose property will be adversely impacted by this proposal.

I have the following concerns:
1. Traffic & parking pressure
This high-rise development will bring substantially more vehicles to local roads, causing severe traffic congestion and longer commute times. Existing on-street parking will become extremely scarce for current residents and visitors.

2. Overloaded local public services and infrastructure
Local schools, hospitals, water supply systems and public transport do not have spare capacity to cope with a sudden sharp increase in population. Longer waiting lists for medical and education services will place strain on the whole community.

3. Loss of sunlight, views and privacy
Buildings up to 107 metres tall will cast long shadows over nearby homes, parks and streets. This will make neighbouring properties darker and colder, reduce solar panel efficiency, block outlooks, create wind tunnel effects, and permanently compromise residential privacy.

4. Poor fit with local neighbourhood character
Tall modern glass towers clash sharply with the low-rise, single-family housing that defines this area. The development will damage the existing aesthetic and residential character of Norwest.

5. Fire safety risks
High-density closely-spaced towers create safety hazards. There are serious concerns about emergency vehicle access and fire spread between buildings in this vertical dense development.

6. Property value impact
The above negative impacts will lead to a reduction in local residential property values.

For all these reasons, I object to this development application. I request this proposal be refused, or significantly redesigned to remove these harmful impacts on local residents.

I have seen the previous approval, to be honest the level 6 & level 10 building already not to my wish as they are way too close to the homes, now when I heard about the planning level 17 & 25, it's quite a shocking news for our street and I heard nothing but complaint about this new proposal, the nice residential environment is going to be soon compromised, the construction pollution, the noise, the busy traffic ( already none stop at nearby sites), it is not a sustainable plan for the neighborhood and I strongly object this to happen.

I object to the proposed mixed-use development at 14–16 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest, for the following reasons:

1. Parking and access
Street parking in the surrounding area is already heavily congested, despite recent parking restrictions. On numerous occasions, garbage trucks have been unable to access and empty bins, while delivery vehicles have experienced difficulty reaching properties.

The additional residential and commercial activity generated by this development would place further pressure on limited street parking and local access. I am particularly concerned about whether emergency vehicles could safely and promptly access nearby properties during peak periods.

The applicant should be required to demonstrate that the proposed basement parking is sufficient for residents, visitors, employees and deliveries without causing additional overflow parking in surrounding streets.

2. Traffic congestion
Local roads and nearby shopping centres already experience significant congestion. The proposed 17-storey commercial tower and 25-storey residential tower would introduce substantial additional traffic into the area.

A detailed and independent assessment should consider cumulative traffic impacts, including other approved or proposed developments in Norwest, rather than assessing this development in isolation. The assessment should address peak-hour congestion, intersections, shopping-centre access, deliveries, waste collection and emergency access.

3. Overshadowing and loss of sunlight
The proposed building height and scale could cause significant overshadowing and loss of sunlight for surrounding residents and public spaces. This may adversely affect residents’ amenity, privacy and enjoyment of their homes.

Detailed shadow diagrams should demonstrate the effects throughout the year and at different times of day. Any unreasonable overshadowing should be addressed by reducing the height and bulk of the development and increasing setbacks.

4. Excessive height, bulk and incompatible character
The proposed towers are significantly larger than the surrounding development and would conflict with the existing character and visual appearance of the neighbourhood.

The application also seeks substantial changes to existing planning controls, including increasing the maximum building height from RL129.2 metres to RL180.5 metres and the floor-space ratio from 2.65:1 to 5.52:1. These are major increases and should not be approved unless there is a compelling public benefit and the resulting impacts can be adequately addressed.

Conclusion

I ask the Department to refuse the application in its current form. At a minimum, the development should be substantially reduced in height and bulk, with additional setbacks and adequate on-site parking, servicing and access arrangements.

Please consider the cumulative effects of this proposal on parking, traffic, emergency access, sunlight, residential amenity and the character of the surrounding area.

I strongly object to SSD-98063208 and the associated concurrent rezoning.
My home is on the immediate southern residential interface and is one of the properties most severely affected by this proposal. Replacing the approved six- and ten-storey development with 17- and 25-storey towers would cause unacceptable permanent impacts on sunlight, outlook, privacy and residential amenity.
The applicant's own shadow diagrams demonstrate serious year-round overshadowing of my home. Direct additional shadow reaches my property in every season assessed, including on the summer solstice, while the lower winter sun causes substantially more extensive and prolonged loss of sunlight. This is not an occasional or minor impact. It is a permanent and unacceptable deterioration in the solar access and amenity of one of the homes most severely affected by the proposal.
The 25-storey residential tower would place numerous apartments, balconies and communal areas high above the adjoining homes. My backyard, outdoor living areas and residential windows would be exposed to overlooking from multiple levels, creating a persistent and deeply uncomfortable sense of being watched from above while using my own home. This would destroy the privacy and seclusion that residents should reasonably expect in their homes and gardens. Landscaping and boundary screening cannot prevent overlooking from a tower of this height.
The proposed height and bulk are fundamentally incompatible with this sensitive residential boundary. An approximately 89-metre tower would dominate nearby homes and Fairmont Avenue Reserve, permanently reducing visible sky, outlook and the established low-density residential character.
The proposed five-level basement would require extensive excavation, piling, rock breaking and ground-support works close to existing homes. Construction noise at the nearest Fairmont Avenue receiver group is predicted to reach 77 dB(A). The technical reports also adopt conflicting vibration limits: Appendix V recommends a maximum PPV of 5 mm/s for residential and low-rise buildings, while Appendix R refers to warning and halt levels of 11.5 and 15 mm/s. This unresolved inconsistency creates a serious risk that nearby homes may not be adequately protected from vibration, ground movement and property damage.
The Hills Shire Council has opposed residential development on this employment land and identified no demonstrated strategic need to sacrifice the site for housing. The proposal is excessive, unnecessary and substantially more damaging than the development already approved.
I request that SSD-98063208 and the associated rezoning be refused in full. The existing approved six- and ten-storey development under DA 426/2024/JP should remain the maximum acceptable development outcome for this site. These fundamental impacts cannot be adequately resolved through minor amendments, landscaping, management plans or consent conditions.
Please refer to my attached detailed objection for the supporting evidence, figures and document references.

To: NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Re: Formal Objection – Revised State Significant Development Proposal, 14–16 Brookhollow Avenue,
Norwest
Dear Sir/Madam,
I
write to formally register my strong objection to the revised development proposal for 14–16
Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest, particularly the proposed increase in building height, density and
overall development capacity.
While I recognise the importance of providing additional housing and supporting the continued
development of Norwest, such development must be appropriately planned, sustainable and
responsive to the existing character, infrastructure and amenity of the surrounding community.
The progressive increase in the scale of this development raises serious concerns about the integrity
of the original planning approval and the cumulative impact on residents.
1. Significant Increase in Building Height and Density
The original development approved in 2021/2022 provided for a six- and ten-storey development.
Subsequent proposals have progressively increased the project's scale, with the current revised
proposal seeking buildings of approximately 17 and 25 storeys.
This represents a substantial departure from the originally approved development and raises
legitimate questions about the appropriateness of the proposed building heights, density and overall
scale.
The fact that a site has previously received development approval should not establish an automatic
entitlement to progressively increase building height and density without a comprehensive
reassessment of the consequences for the surrounding community.
I
strongly believe the proposed variation represents excessive intensification and should not be
considered in isolation from its cumulative impact on the broader Norwest precinct.
2. Traffic Congestion and Parking
Norwest and its surrounding residential areas already experience considerable traffic pressures,
particularly during morning and afternoon peak periods.
A development of this scale will add residents, employees, visitors, and service vehicles to an already
busy road network.
I am particularly concerned about:
• Increased congestion along Brookhollow Avenue and surrounding roads.
• Additional pressure on intersections and access points.
• Increased demand for on-street parking.
• The adequacy of proposed parking arrangements for residents, employees and visitors.
• Emergency vehicle access and the movement of delivery and service vehicles.
A comprehensive, independently assessed traffic and parking impact study should be required, taking
account of existing developments, approved projects, and future growth across the Norwest precinct.
3. Pressure on Existing Infrastructure and Community Services
The proposed increase in residential and commercial density will place additional demands on local
infrastructure and community services.
This includes roads, public transport, water and sewerage systems, schools, healthcare facilities,
recreational areas and other essential community infrastructure.
It is unreasonable to continue approving substantial increases in development density without clear
evidence that the necessary infrastructure can accommodate the additional population.
The planning process must demonstrate that infrastructure provision will occur in advance of, or at
least concurrently with, development rather than placing the burden of inadequate services on
existing residents.
4. Overshadowing, Privacy and Residential Amenity
The proposed building heights raise significant concerns regarding overshadowing, visual bulk, loss of
privacy and the potential reduction of natural sunlight to neighbouring properties and public spaces.
Buildings of this scale can fundamentally alter the amenity and character of surrounding residential
areas.
Particular attention should be given to the potential impact on existing homes, outdoor living areas,
gardens and solar panel performance.
Detailed shadow diagrams, visual impact assessments and privacy studies should be made publicly
available and independently assessed before any determination is made.
5. Neighbourhood Character and Overdevelopment
The Norwest precinct has developed as an important residential and commercial centre with a
distinctive character and environment.
While contemporary development is an important part of its future, the scale of new buildings must
remain consistent with responsible urban planning and the community's long-term interests.
The proposed increase to 17 and 25 storeys raises serious concerns about excessive building bulk, the
relationship between the proposed towers and surrounding developments, and the precedent it may
set for further increases in building heights throughout the precinct.
Planning decisions should not simply respond to the maximum development potential of an individual
site. They must consider the collective impact of multiple developments on the character,
functionality and liveability of the wider community.
6. Community Consultation and Transparency
I am particularly concerned about the progressive escalation of the development from the originally
approved six- and ten-storey buildings to the substantially larger proposal now being advanced.
Such a significant change warrants meaningful community consultation and a transparent explanation
of the planning justification for the increased building heights and density outside the exhibition and
associated documents.
Residents should be provided with clear information about what has changed, why these changes are
being sought and how the additional impacts will be managed.
Community consultation must be more than a procedural requirement. The concerns of existing
residents should be genuinely considered and reflected in the final planning determination.
7. Request for Reconsideration
In light of these concerns, I respectfully request that the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and
Infrastructure:
1. Reject the proposed increase in building height and density in its current form.
2. Require a comprehensive assessment of the cumulative traffic, parking, infrastructure and
environmental impacts of the revised development.
3. Ensure that independent assessments of overshadowing, privacy, visual impact and
neighbourhood amenity are undertaken and made publicly available.
4. Demonstrate that existing and planned infrastructure can adequately support the proposed
additional population.
5. Require the developer to provide a clear planning justification for the substantial increase
from the originally approved development.
6. Give appropriate weight to the concerns and long-term interests of existing residents and the
broader Norwest community.
Conclusion
I am not opposed to appropriate and well-planned development in Norwest. However, I strongly
object to the progressive intensification of this proposal without clear evidence that the surrounding
infrastructure, environment and community can accommodate the increased scale.
The proposed development should be assessed against the principles of responsible planning,
sustainability, community amenity and the long-term liveability of Norwest.
The central question is not simply whether this site can accommodate additional building height
and density, but whether such an increase is appropriate, justified, and in the best interests of the
existing and future Norwest community.
I respectfully request that you not approve the revised proposal in its current form and that you
carefully consider the concerns raised in this submission and others before any final determination.
Yours faithfully,
Dr Michael Krawec
Concerned Resident
3 Fairmont Ave Norwest
Norwest Community

We desperately need more homes. According to the 2021 census homelessness is increasing. According to KPMG home ownership in Sydney is lowest since 1954

I support this proposal. I note that this proposal is a few hundred metres from a shopping centre and metro. People will likely self-select who don't want to drive and can catch the metro to work.

We should take this opportunity to improve the urban planning of the local area - bike paths, cut throughs, parks, shops and other amenities that will make Castle Hill a more pleasant place to live

"My Submission:
I would like to add a submission on behalf of our properties at Units 122 $ 123 at ATLAS Building 2-8 Brookhollow Avenue NORWEST NSW 2153.
I would like to oppose the proposed development and building a Data centre in the proposed location.
I would like to submit against the proposal and request the project to be relocated elsewhere more suitable for such Datacenter.
My objections to the subject project are listed below:
(1) It is too risky to have all these equipment's and highly volatile Diesel Storage in the vicinity of residential and light commercial area
(2) There are hotels next door
(3) We have Childcare in house and Gym etc at Atlas Building , 2-8 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest NSW 2153, exactly opposite the proposed property at 3 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest NSW 2153.
(4) WATER REQUIREMENTS:
• Proposed Data Centre will require massive amounts of water to Cool the Network, as well as 18 Diesel Engines to support the Data Centre.
• A Data Centre will be consuming roughly 25 million litres per megawatt (MW) annually for traditional evaporative systems, while closed-loop or air-cooled designs use near-zero water.
Key Factors Impacting Water Use
• IT Megawatt Capacity: Standard metrics indicate consumption of about 25 to 25.5 million litres of water per MW of IT load per year for typical water-cooled setups.
• Cooling Technology: Evaporative cooling towers demand continuous makeup water, whereas closed-loop liquid systems or air-cooled chillers drastically drop consumption.
• Facility Scale & Racks: A multi-storey footprint scaling to tens of megawatts can easily consume tens of millions of litres daily or tens of gigalitres annually if purely water-reliant.
(5) Data Centre will be noisy as well as 24/7 traffic movements will be hazardous to the communities in and arounds
(6) This project will reduce our properties values in an around the proposed locations
(7) Traffic at Norwest Boulevard is already a parking lot in peak hours - additional apartments are already loading further to the over crowded roads and the Data Centre's traffic 24/7 will add further congestion to the crowded roads in and around the proposed location.
This type of development may better be in the industrial zone-perhaps near the CIRCA Shopping Centre Bella Vista NSW2153 or Victoria Road Castle Hills NSW 2154 instead of near the residential and light commercial area"

Thanks
With Kind Regards
Safiq Khan

I support the project, I believe it will significantly improve housing affordability and availability in the area.

I would however like to see the number of units and storeys significantly increased as well as units set aside for essential workers.

Please refer to the attached documents.

The small local area and roads can not handle anymore people. There is no parking already.

The area will be too crowded.

I object to the proposed development and associated rezoning application for 14-16 Brookhollow Avenue, Norwest. The proposal seeks approval for a 17-storey commercial tower and a 25-storey residential tower, together with a substantial increase in the permissible building height from RL129.2m to RL180.5m and a significant increase in floor space ratio from 2.65:1 to 5.52:1.
The proposed increases in height and gross floor area represent an excessive intensification of development and constitute an overdevelopment of the site. The scale, bulk and density of the proposal are inconsistent with the existing planning controls and are likely to adversely impact the surrounding precinct.
The development is likely to generate a significant increase in traffic movements, placing additional pressure on Brookhollow Avenue and surrounding road infrastructure, which already experience congestion during peak periods. The additional residential and commercial floor space will increase vehicle trips, reduce network efficiency and negatively impact local amenity.
The proposed increases in height and gross floor area represent an excessive intensification of development and constitute an overdevelopment of the site. The scale, bulk and density of the proposal are inconsistent with the existing planning controls and are likely to adversely impact the surrounding precinct.

The development is likely to generate a significant increase in traffic movements, placing additional pressure on Brookhollow Avenue and surrounding road infrastructure, which already experience congestion during peak periods. The additional residential and commercial floor space will increase vehicle trips, reduce network efficiency and negatively impact local amenity.

The proposed height increase will also result in greater overshadowing of neighbouring properties, streets and public spaces, reducing access to natural sunlight and adversely affecting the amenity of the surrounding area. The excessive height and bulk of the towers are out of scale with the existing built environment and will have a detrimental visual and environmental impact.
In addition, the proposal raises concerns regarding parking demand. Despite the provision of basement parking, developments of this scale often create parking spillover into surrounding streets and commercial areas, resulting in increased competition for parking, inconvenience to existing residents and businesses, and additional traffic circulation associated with vehicles searching for parking.
For these reasons, I request that the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure refuse the proposed increases in building height and floor space ratio, or alternatively require a substantial reduction in the scale and density of the development to ensure that it is compatible with the surrounding area and does not create unacceptable impacts on traffic, overshadowing, parking and local infrastructure.

We are living on Fairmont Ave. Norwest 2153 which is a narrow street approx. 6 metres wide. Currently, parking are allowed along the street which are always full causing the traffic both ways extremely difficult especially emergency situations, i.e. ambulance, fire evacuations etc.
High building project like 14-16 Brookhollow proposal will make the traffic worsened, and even more without council resources monitoring parking time limit offences as current daily situation.
Local resource from The Hills Council needs to be available to make sure people strictly follow parking time limit. This issue must be considered as one of the most priority before approval.

This project site backs onto residential areas in Fairmont Avenue Norwest. I live in Hillsborough Way Norwest which feeds Fairmont Ave. Our current experience is with the construction of the Data Centre at 3 Brookhollow Ave Norwest which has been a nightmare. The current experience is that the Data Centre is working 24/7. We hear noise all night from reversing beepers. In addition parking has been a nightmare. Hills Shire Council is not enforcing building hours. In addition Tradies are parking around the clock in residential streets of Hillsborough Way and Fairmont Avenue Norwest. The streets are narrow and are congested due to the significant amount of Trady vehicles. This is also causing a noise issue when Tradies are parked and making noise when they return to their cars in the middle of the night.

Therefore in relation to 14-16 Brookhollow Ave Norwest there are 2 major issues:

1.Tradie Parking During Construction
This site 14-16 Brookhollow Ave Norwest MUST address and accommodate parking for Tradies during construction so they are kept within the site or a dedicated area provided somewhere in Brookhollow Ave. Tradies should not be using the residential streets for parking during construction due to noise and congestion. They won’t be able to park in Hillsborough and Fairmont as new parking restrictions will be implemented by Hills Shire Council. As far as I am concerned this is a very serious issue that must be addressed.

2. Working Hours
Due to noise from construction Work, site working hours must be limited to daytime Monday to Friday and Saturday Morning only. There can be no work allowed overnight or Saturday afternoon or Sunday. The times must be limited to 7am to 6pm Monday to Friday and Saturday from 08am to 2pm as per Hills Hire Council restrictions. No work can be approved outside these hours. This is also a serious issue.

I STRONGLY OBJECT to the proposed development at 14 Brookhollow Ave. The revised proposal is completely inconsistent with the original DA (approved on 3 October 2024) comprising of two buildings with maximum heights of 6 and 10 storeys with NO residential component. The impacts associated with the original proposal were minimal with virtually no overshadowing, privacy or traffic issues for surrounding residents.
The updated proposal (which is a monstrosity) significantly departs from what was previously approved with the out-of-the-blue addition of a residential component - that comprises the bulk (and hence true purpose) of the new development - and an exponential increase in the height of the two buildings, from 6 to 17 storeys and 10 to 25 storeys respectively. This is despite the fact that the Hills Shire Council have previously reserved this section of the Business Park for EMPLOYMENT USE ONLY - which is much needed in the Hills - and also that the site will be right across the road from a massive new Data Centre development. Who puts a residential building right next to a Data Centre? It's clear that the purpose of the revised DA is to maximise Developer profits (only) with NO regard to the well thought through Strategic Plan of the Council, nor to the detrimental impacts on local residents.
In this regard, there will now be significant overshadowing of local homes, particularly in Winter, which is the WORST possible time to not have access to the sun and the natural heat it provides. In my street alone there will be an over 200% increase in overshadowing compared to the originally approved design!! The other side effects of the new building heights and mass residential crowding on the site, are the loss of privacy to local residents, noise issues and substantial additional traffic congestion - noting there be 155 new residential dwellings (previously 0) as well as hundreds of people working in the 17 storey business tower - the vast majority of which will be driving to and from work each day.
Given that the revised proposal is HOPELESSLY inconsistent with both the character of the area and Council's Strategic plans, the proposed development should be significantly scaled back so that the HARMFUL impacts to surrounding residents are minimised and the Business Park continues to provide employment opportunities to the growing residents of western Sydney (as it was always intended to do).

This proposal is a terrible idea. Traffic and people congestion is already at an unacceptable level in Norwest. Building a hign rise such as that proposed on such a small site is ridiculous.

We reside right behind this project as it has been approval by local council to the a 6 & 10 storey building in 2022. This approval is similar to 22 Brookhollow Ave, Norwest and can blend in with the area growth. But seeking approval for more then double the size is beyond imagination! This will defiantly have significant impact on local neighboring traffic, crowed roads, strained service, parking shortages, clashing aesthetics, Fire Safety and Risk, neighborhood characteristic and loss of sunlight for our home and surrounding neighbor’s.
Currently the neighborhood is already experiencing service strains, amenity impacts, parking and traffic issues with surrounding develop like 3 Brookhollow Ave Norwest & Shadwood/Asora Crn Barina Down Dr & Mackillop Dr Norwest.
As of now there isn’t much sunlight due to the over grow vegetations. Imagin approving a 17 & 25 storey building up to 120m with 30m buffer zone from a normal house!
Unless the neighborhood area been rezone to allow to blend in with development build up to core Centre like I demonstrate on Horatio St, Norwest to Spurway Dr, Norwest onto Century Dr Norwest where development are gradually building up high.
I would like to see a resolution of project rejection or compensation for improvement to my property on permanent overshadowing, loss of privacy, blocked views, and wind tunnels shoul dthis project goes ahead.
I will be taking legal avenue to persuade my family living standards should this happens.

Position: I object to the proposal in its current form until the matters below are properly checked and addressed.

I live at 9 Fairmont Avenue, south of the site. I accept that Norwest is changing and I am not objecting simply because the project is larger than the buildings there today. After reviewing the applicant's shadow drawings again, overshadowing is my main concern. The drawings show a much larger shadow than the approved scheme, while the address-level effect on homes on both sides of Fairmont Avenue and toward Bethany Court is not shown clearly. I also remain concerned that the current data centre expansion is not fully reflected in the cumulative noise and traffic work.

I am asking for matters that can be checked before determination and, where an impact is confirmed, reduced through practical design changes or clear conditions of consent. The details of my objection are provided in attached PDF file.