I support the project

I would love to see more apartments around the area, but have the following concerns regarding this proposal:

• Traffic Concerns and Pedestrian Safety - Per the traffic impact assessment (appendix 15) access to the site will be via Station/Peace Lane, which the document describes as "(...) a one-way westbound access laneway that provides rear access to properties on the southern side of Marion Street. There are no formal footpaths on either side of Station Lane." This excludes that Station Lane is a residential laneway, with multiple 3 to 6 storey apartment blocks. Residents of both Station Lane and Raymond Lane frequently along the centre of this laneway, given the lack of footpaths, including many small children who ride their bikes on the usually quiet road. Station Lane is the only access for the 6-storey apartment block on 4 Station Lane.
A significant increase in traffic on Station Lane must be weighed against the current condition of the laneway - narrow, one-way, with no sidewalks and a lack of clear 'one-way' signs meaning cars are often driving in the wrong direction.
I also note that, in the traffic modelling, traffic has not been modelled along Station Lane or its intersections (Station Street West into Station Lane, Station Lane into High Street, Station Lane into Raymond Lane). These are not listed in the Lane Summaries and do not appear in the modelling in Appendix B - forecast future traffic volumes. This is a significant omission given that, as identified in Figure 18, these intersections will handle any and all resident traffic.
Table 4 – Proposed development trip generation estimates an average of 56 additional trips in the AM peak hour, and 70 additional trips in the PM peak hour. The generations rates used to find these averages are based on a 2012 survey of developments within Sydney, with the dominant mode at that time being walking (62%). The table comes with caveats on when these rates should be used, and given that in 2016 the dominant mode in Parramatta was car (>50%) these estimates are far from accurate.
As far as pedestrian safety is concerned, the intersection of Marion Street, High Street and Jubilee Lane is of particular concern. Residents in the area often cross Marion Street to walk down Jubilee Lane, as this is both the access to Jubilee Park and the best route to Parramatta CBD and Parramatta Station. There is currently no safe way to cross this portion of road. There is no pedestrian crossing, no traffic lights, wide lines and car behaviour at the intersection that is often hard to read. There are often unaccompanied children crossing this section of road to reach the park. Even with the additional public pathway included in this proposal, an increase in traffic would create a more significant safety risk to the many young families of the area.
Finally, with reference again the conditions of Station Lane, I am concerned about overflow parking given the maximum 195 car spaces for a proposed 296 units, and a single retail parking spot. Again referencing the Traffic Impact Assessment, Figure 11 "(...) indicates that the majority of households within Parramatta own at least one car". This would mean that around 100 households likely to own a car do not have a parking spot, and so will likely add to the volume of cars parked along Station Lane and adjoining streets. Parking along Station Lane and High Street is already at capacity, with Marion Street parking being paid. It is not clear how this would impact the roads in the area.

• Shadowing and View Obstruction - The shadow model shown in the full architectural set (appendix 3a) is difficult to read as the only available show modelling includes 'other proposed developments' that do not exist and, from what I can tell, haven't even been approved. This is misleading as it covers the actual shadow of the proposal. The model does not cover the full daylight hours, and as residents of the area we are certain that this proposal would have an obvious negative impact on both the sunlight received in the morning and the views of Harris Park and surrounds. Paired with the diagram showing the sun's path and wind direction it becomes clear that the building opposite on Station Lane, 27 Station Lane, would receive little to no sun in winter yet would be exposed to the cold southerly winds. This raises concern for the living conditions of the residents, as well as a question of increased energy consumption of affected residents in the area who may need to use extra electricity to heat their homes and dry their laundry.
On this note, the Pedestrian Wind Environment Study (appendix 20) also raises concerns of increased wind, particularly at the entrance of Station Lane. This would cause issues for both the very young and older residents who may have poorer stability.

• Connecting with Country - I echo the concerns raised in section 5.4.1.4 of the Connecting with Country report, specifically in relation to the height of the proposal and environmental conditions of the laneway. With respect to section 5.4.2.2 I strongly agree with the importance of access considerations, seating, and the primary importance of adapting environments to people with disabilities, not the other way around. Concerns raised on the size of the site and the impact on the visual environment mirror my own thoughts.

• View Impact - Thew View Impact (appendix 22) provides a 'visual impact analysis' of different views. Apart from the photos being taken at just the right angle for a nearby tree to block the view of the proposed building, I note that the impact of 'Existing View 2' is shown on the table as being Moderate-Low, however the conclusion specifies that current impact would currently be severe. Even including the proposed additional high-rise buildings that may be built in the future, this only drops to moderate with no indicition on the period of time the view would be impacted severely.

• Inconsistencies in the documents - Application_20260317031810 states that The Trustee for CN Marion Unit Trust does not have written consent of all landowners. The Land Owners Consent, signed the same day on behalf of The Trustee for CN Marion Unit Trust , states that they are the legal owners of 33-43 Marion Street and grant consent. There appear to be a number of errors in the application including the number of dwellings (400 vs 296) and number of affordable in-fill dwellings (12 vs 29). The size of the site is listed in the application as being 2,374sqm but in the Stage 1 Report (appendix 6) as being 2,394sqm and in the catchment plan (appendix 7) as being 2,375sqm. The EIS references 5 basement parking levels, but the design report mentions 6 levels. It's difficult to get a clear understanding of the scope of this proposal with crucial details changing throughout the provided documents.

• Community engagement - the Engagement Report (appendix 9) states that flyers were delivered to the local community to inform them of the proposal in October 2025. Although I live along the route provided, I did not receive a flyer. I was informed of the proposal and that submissions were open via a letter received around April 16. I had not heard of this proposal previously. There are frequent mentions of concerns being raised by 'one survey responder' as though the low number is telling, however there were only a total of 2 survey responders total.

my Key concerns include:
Overshadowing: Potential loss of solar access for units and common areas.
Privacy: Increased overlooking from the proposed high-rise structure.
Traffic and Noise: Increased congestion and noise during and after construction. The proposed driveway access via Peach Lane is of particular concern, as it is narrow, has no footpath, and may pose safety risks for pedestrians. The proposed car park capacity of 189 vehicles (excluding motorcycles and bicycles) is also significantly high for the lane’s current capacity.
Visual Amenity: The scale of the project in relation to the existing building.

My name is John Zhao, and I have been a resident of 9–11 Cowper Street for the past 15 years, living in an eight-storey apartment building. Over this time, I have witnessed the ongoing development and transformation of Cowper Street—changes that, in some cases, have not been for the better.

Cowper Street is already a high-density residential area, where residents face ongoing challenges such as limited parking availability due to the number of apartment buildings, as well as significant noise pollution from both traffic and pedestrian activity. The proposed addition of a 37-storey tower comprising 296 dwellings would place further strain on an area that is already operating beyond comfortable capacity.

While I understand and support appropriate urban development—particularly within the Parramatta CBD—the scale of this proposal appears excessive given its location on the fringe of Parramatta and Harris Park. This is especially concerning when compared to nearby developments, such as 8 Cowper Street, which has a maximum height of 17 storeys. The proposed building is therefore grossly disproportionate to its immediate surroundings.

Traffic and access present additional concerns. The proposal identifies entry via “Peace Lane,” which is in fact Station Lane. This is a narrow laneway that already accommodates parked vehicles and provides access for multiple residential properties. Increased use of this lane by construction vehicles, service trucks, and additional resident traffic will significantly impact safety and further reduce the amenity of an already constrained space.

I am also concerned that this development is proposed as a build-to-rent project. Based on my experience serving on the executive committee of my apartment building, there are often ongoing challenges associated with high tenant turnover. Transient occupancy can lead to reduced accountability and, in some cases, a lack of respect for both the building and the broader neighbourhood.

Furthermore, the photomontages included in the proposal appear to be misleading. They depict open green spaces at the corners of Cowper and Marion Streets, whereas in reality these areas are occupied by heritage houses and existing low-rise apartments. The images also suggest pedestrian crossings and an open, landscaped link between Marion Street and Station Lane that does not accurately reflect the current conditions. In practice, this connection would lead to a narrow and uninviting laneway, making it unlikely to function as an ակտիվ or well-used public space.

My final concern relates to the proposed shop-top housing model. Several existing developments along Cowper Street already adopt this approach; however, in practice, the ground-floor tenancies are predominantly used for health services or office spaces rather than active retail. As a result, these uses do not generate meaningful pedestrian activity or street-level vibrancy. This raises doubts about the proposal’s claim that it will activate the through-site link and contribute to a lively, engaged public domain.

As a long-term resident, my concerns are not with development itself. I recognise that Parramatta is a growing and increasingly vibrant city. Rather, my concern lies with ensuring that development is balanced, appropriate in scale, and mindful of the quality of life of existing residents—particularly those who have made a long-term commitment to the community.

The project leads to an unfair scenario for the residents in 27 Station Street West. Below are some of the adverse effects that they will experience when the project is completely finished.
• Loss of natural sunlight and ventilation
• Reduced privacy, as the new building can overlook 27 Station Street apartments
• Increased noise, dust, and disturbance during construction
• More traffic and parking issues in the area. The area is quite congested on Station Street and this will intensify even further.
• Big impact on property value