Residential development with infill affordable housing, 84 Tallawong Road, Rouse Hill

I object to this project. The proposed high-density development will have a significant and detrimental impact on the character and liveability of the entire suburb.

Introducing a large number of affordable apartments is likely to increase population pressure and attract a higher proportion of lower-income residents, which may adversely affect local infrastructure, traffic, and community safety.

In addition, the height and scale of the building will severely compromise the privacy, sunlight access, and general amenity of neighbouring households. The overshadowing and overlooking issues are unacceptable and would negatively affect the daily living conditions of nearby residents.

I am writing to object to the proposed development of approximately 434 units + affordable housing units located directly north of my premises. My concerns relate solely to the planning impacts of this specific proposal and its suitability within the developing precinct.

1. Significant Overshadowing Due to North-Side Position (Major Planning Concern)
Because the site is positioned north of my property, any increase in building height will directly affect the solar access of my home and outdoor areas.
In NSW, planning controls generally require that:
-- Living rooms and private open space receive a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight between 9am–3pm
-- New developments must not unreasonably overshadow neighbouring properties, especially when located to the north
A multi-building development of this scale has the clear potential to:
-- Block winter sunlight (when the sun sits lower in the northern sky)
-- Reduce natural lighting to my home
-- Affect thermal comfort and increase energy usage
-- Diminish the usability of my open space
A detailed sunlight and overshadowing study must be provided. Based on the proposed scale, it is highly likely that overshadowing impacts will be unacceptable under NSW planning standards.

2. Departure From the Original Planning Expectations for the Precinct
When early residents purchased in this area, available planning materials and indicative layouts showed nearby land intended for low-rise residential dwellings.
A sudden change to a high-density development comprising 460 units is a substantial deviation from the density originally communicated. A development of this scale should require:
-- A formal review of the precinct’s planning controls
-- Public consultation
-- Evidence that this increased density aligns with long-term planning strategies
Residents made purchasing decisions based on the earlier plans, and the proposed density is inconsistent with those expectations.

3. Infrastructure Not Designed for This Density
Key infrastructure—including stormwater, sewerage, access roads, public transport, and local community facilities—was planned around the original low-density intent for the precinct.
Introducing hundreds of additional dwellings at once risks overloading infrastructure that has not been upgraded to handle such a population increase.
The proposal does not demonstrate:
-- How additional demand on utilities will be managed
-- Whether systems can accommodate the scale of development
-- Any planned upgrades to support increased density
This raises concerns about long-term functionality of essential services.

4. Traffic and Access Issues Under Future Full Development
Although the area is still developing, traffic modelling must reflect future full build-out conditions, not current light usage.
A development housing an estimated 700–900 residents will significantly increase vehicle movements on local roads originally designed for moderate-density neighbourhoods. Without proper modelling and mitigation measures, long-term congestion and access issues are likely.

5. Open Space, Landscaping, and Amenity Concerns
The proposal does not clearly demonstrate adequate provision of:
-- Communal open space
-- Landscaping
-- Pedestrian and bicycle connections
-- Suitable setbacks
This is essential in large-scale developments to maintain liveability and reduce pressure on public spaces.

Given the extensive overshadowing risk due to the development’s position directly north of my property, the departure from original planning intent, and the lack of demonstrated infrastructure capacity, I respectfully request that the council refuse the development in its current form or require substantial modifications.

Thank you for considering my submission.

I am a neighbouring property owner and occupier residing near the proposed development at 84 Tallawong Road, Rouse Hill.
I would like to state that I support the objective of providing affordable housing and acknowledge the importance of increasing housing supply in well-located areas such as Tallawong. However, my support is conditional, and I wish to raise several important matters that must be addressed to ensure the development is sustainable and does not place undue pressure on the surrounding community.

1. Traffic and Road Capacity Concerns
Tallawong Road and surrounding local roads are already experiencing increased traffic volumes, particularly during peak commuting hours. The proposed increase in dwellings will inevitably result in additional vehicle movements.
At present, road capacity, intersections, and public transport connectivity appear insufficient to support the scale of the proposed development without adequate upgrades. I respectfully request that:
• A comprehensive and updated traffic impact assessment be undertaken
• Clear commitments be made to road and intersection upgrades prior to or concurrent with increased occupancy
• Construction traffic management measures minimise disruption to existing residents

2. Insufficient Local Infrastructure and Essential Services
Local infrastructure is not keeping pace with residential development in the Tallawong–Rouse Hill area. Access to community facilities, open space and pedestrian infrastructure remains limited.
In addition, there is currently no major supermarket or full-line grocery store within convenient distance to support the existing and proposed residential population. This results in increased reliance on private vehicle trips for essential daily needs, further contributing to congestion and reducing liveability.
Access to essential services such as supermarkets should be considered a core component of supporting infrastructure for higher-density development.

3. Delivery of the Proposed Sports Park at 95 Tallawong Road
I strongly urge the Department and relevant authorities to prioritise and accelerate the delivery of the proposed sports park at 95 Tallawong Road.
With increasing residential density, access to recreational and open space is critical for community wellbeing. Timely delivery of this facility would significantly help mitigate the impacts of population growth. I respectfully request that approval of this development be linked to clear timeframes or conditions to ensure the sports park is delivered as early as possible.

In summary, while I support the intent of the proposed development and the provision of affordable housing, I believe approval should be conditional upon meaningful upgrades to transport infrastructure, improved access to essential services such as a major supermarket, and the accelerated delivery of supporting community facilities, particularly the proposed sports park at 95 Tallawong Road.

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission.

I am writing regarding the proposed modification to SSD-80287510 for 84 Tallawong Road. I will be living at 74 Tallawong Road, directly next to the development, and the changes being requested would have a clear and immediate impact on my property and daily life.

I support development in this area, including affordable housing, but the increase in dwelling numbers raises several concerns that have not been properly addressed.

1. Site Intensity and Overdevelopment

The project is already dense for its location. Adding more units places extra pressure on a neighbourhood made up mostly of low-rise homes and quiet residential streets.

2. Traffic and Parking Issues

No updated traffic or parking studies have been provided. Tallawong Road is already busy, and additional residents will worsen congestion, increase on-street parking, and create safety risks for families walking or driving in the area.

3. Local Infrastructure Limitations

There is no information about how extra demand will be managed in terms of stormwater, waste collection, and other essential services. Without these assessments, the impact on the community cannot be properly understood.

4. Privacy and Residential Amenity

More dwellings mean more occupants facing neighbouring homes. This reduces privacy for surrounding properties, including mine, which sits directly beside the site.

5. Extended Construction Disturbance

Any increase in work scope will prolong noise, dust, and disruption for nearby residents, particularly those living immediately next to the boundary.

For these reasons, I ask that the Department decline the proposed modification and maintain the development as previously approved.

Thank you for your time and consideration.



Kind regards,

Wendy Zhao

Resident – 74 Tallawong Road, Rouse Hill

I support the project

Dear Assessing Officer,

I am a homeowner and resident in the immediate surrounding area (13 Wilbertree Street, Rouse Hill). I appreciate the opportunity to provide feedback regarding the proposed development at 84 Tallawong Road.

While I acknowledge the need for diverse housing options within the Tallawong/Rouse Hill growth corridor, I would like to raise several concerns regarding the current proposal. My intention is not to oppose redevelopment outright, but to request refinement to ensure a balanced urban outcome that integrates appropriately with the existing low-density neighbourhood.

1. Traffic Impact and Local Street Safety

Tallawong Road already experiences significant traffic from nearby residential estates.
The proposed scale of 434 units, with additional visitor and service vehicles, will substantially increase traffic volume.

Requests:
• Undertake a more detailed traffic assessment including peak-hour modelling.
• Consider redesigning site access to minimise overflow traffic into adjacent residential streets (including Wilbertree Street).
• Increase on-site parking provision to avoid spill-over parking on surrounding streets.

2. Building Height & Transition to Existing Low-Density Housing

The proposed 5.5 or 6-storey built form sits directly adjacent to newly established low-density homes.

Requests:
• Introduce height transition on the edges closest to the low-density area (e.g., stepping down to 2–3 storeys).
• Increase boundary setbacks and implement stronger landscape buffers to protect privacy, daylight access and residential character.
• Review overshadowing impacts specifically on Wilbertree Street dwellings.

3. Affordable Housing Management & CPTED Integration

While I support the inclusion of infill affordable rental housing as part of a diverse community, clarity is required regarding the management structure.

Requests:
• Clearly identify the registered Community Housing Provider responsible for the affordable dwellings.
• Provide details on tenancy selection, ongoing management, and maintenance standards.
• Incorporate detailed CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) measures to ensure safety for both future residents and the surrounding community.

4. Construction Management

Given the scale of the project, construction activity will significantly affect nearby residents.

Requests:
• Provide a Construction Management Plan outlining traffic control, construction hours, dust/noise mitigation, and worker parking arrangements.
• Avoid construction vehicle access through narrow residential streets.

Conclusion

I respectfully request that the Department consider the above points and require modifications to ensure the development integrates appropriately with the existing community and minimises negative impact on the surrounding low-density neighbourhood.

Thank you for considering my submission.

Warmest,
Owner of 13 Wilbertree Street, Rouse Hill

Hi Team,
As a future resident of lot 30, 74 Tallawong Road, Rouse Hill, I am writing this letter to raise objection to this proposal.

The increase from existing proposal of 127 residential units to 434 apartment will inevitably increase pressure to existing traffic level in the vincinity, which is already seen sign of congestion in peak hours

The close proximity of 84 Tallawong Road to proposed Tallawong Public School will worsen the traffic condition during peak and school hours. This will pose hazards of vehicle interaction to children passing by before and after school.

Tallawong Train Station has already seen huge demand and limited supply of car park space at current stage. An increase of 434 apartment will inevitably make current situation worse.

Above are my opinion from the broader community point of view. As one of many residents in 74 Tallawong Road, we would also love to enjoy the sunshine and scenery promised to us when we purchased the house & land package. Through out the years we have been patiently waiting for the delivery of the project and endured harsh financial situations. Approval of such high density apartment project will inevitably rip off the benefit of this long overdue house & land project.

Please consider the demand of local residents prior to making any decision of this new proposal.

While I acknowledge the need for additional housing and community facilities, I am concerned that the existing local infrastructure is not currently adequate to support the scale and pace of development being proposed. In particular:

Road capacity and safety: The current road conditions and capacity on Tallawong Road are already constrained (including limited lanes and limited ability to safely accommodate additional traffic).

Car parking and transport impacts: Parking capacity associated with Tallawong Station and surrounding streets appears insufficient, increasing the likelihood of parking overspill into nearby residential areas.

Health and essential services: There is a lack of nearby hospital/health services relative to the projected increase in population and daily activity generated by the proposal.

If approved in its current form, I am concerned the proposal will lead to increased congestion, parking stress, and additional pressure on already limited services, resulting in a material reduction in local amenity and residents’ quality of life.

Accordingly, I request that the Department not approve the proposal in its current form, and that any approval be contingent on a clear and funded infrastructure/staging plan that demonstrates road, parking/transport, and essential services capacity will be delivered in step with development.

I would prefer not to have dense housing in my area. A consideration, if the project goes ahead, is that this should not be constructed before there is more public transport put in place to and from the metro station. It should also not coincide with the multitude of road works going on in the area namely the piping works to be carried out by Sydney Water on Tallawong Rd in August of next year. There is already so much congestion on the road and the new construction and the increase in population will only exacerbate that.

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to formally object to the proposed residential apartment development at 84 Tallawong Road. While I understand the need to support housing supply, I have serious concerns about the significant negative impacts this proposal would have on traffic, infrastructure, and local parking conditions.

1. Increased Density and Traffic Congestion
The proposed increase in dwelling density will further worsen the severe traffic congestion already experienced in the area. Old Windsor Road is already heavily congested during peak hours, with long delays and persistent bottlenecks. Adding a development of this scale will substantially increase vehicle movements and intensify these existing issues, contributing to reduced road safety and longer commute times for local residents.

2. Insufficient Infrastructure Capacity
The current infrastructure in Tallawong and the surrounding areas is already struggling to meet existing demand. Public transport, utilities, local roads, and community services are under pressure, and the rapid population growth associated with this proposal would exacerbate these strains. Without significant infrastructure upgrades, the development risks overwhelming essential services.

3. Parking Shortages and Local Impact
Parking availability is already a major concern around Tallawong, particularly given that Tallawong Station is a terminal station where many commuters rely on park-and-ride facilities. Existing parking areas are frequently at capacity, leading to spill-over parking on surrounding streets. Rather than adding more dwellings, providing additional parking spaces would more appropriately meet the needs of the local community and ease the existing pressure on both residents and commuters. Prioritising parking infrastructure in this location would deliver far greater public benefit than adding further residential density.

For these reasons, I respectfully request that the council reconsider the proposal for 84 Tallawong Road, or require the development to be redesigned to address traffic, infrastructure, and parking impacts, with a particular focus on supporting additional commuter parking.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Yours sincerely,
Chin Teng Yim

cover letter and rationale attached