1. The places are developed in the last 10years, we have already meet increasing volumn of people
2. the site where about to build, is the main and important entrance from one side of the street, it will affects our daily transport during development (like they will block the road etc)

I am a nearby resident on Loftus Lane and make this submission in response to the exhibited Planning Proposal.

While I acknowledge the need for increased housing supply, I object to the proposal as exhibited due to its excessive scale, inconsistency with local planning controls, and adverse local impacts.

Key Planning Concerns

• Inconsistency with LEP Zone Objectives
The proposed 27–35 storey towers are incompatible with the established low- to mid-rise character of Loftus Crescent and do not provide an appropriate transition to surrounding residential areas.

• Excessive Height and FSR Uplift
The proposal seeks to increase height from 75m to up to 119m and FSR from 3.6:1 to 7.81:1. This more than doubles existing controls and significantly exceeds the scale of nearby approved developments (typically 5–8 storeys), without adequate site-specific justification.

• Amenity Impacts
The proposed height and bulk will result in unacceptable overshadowing, privacy loss, visual dominance and potential wind impacts that cannot be adequately mitigated. It will also affect the existing park adjacent to the proposed site.

• Traffic, Parking and Road Constraints
Loftus Crescent and Loftus Lane are narrow local streets not designed to accommodate traffic generated by 318 dwellings and retail uses. Despite on-site parking provision, congestion, safety risks and parking spill-over are likely.

• Infrastructure Capacity
The proposal does not demonstrate sufficient capacity or funded upgrades for local roads, open space and community infrastructure to support the scale proposed.

Conditional Support

I would support a revised mixed-use outcome subject to:
• Reduced height generally in the range of 6-8 storeys
• Clear height transition toward Loftus Lane and adjacent low-density areas
• Reduced FSR consistent with nearby approvals
• Limited, neighbourhood-scale ground floor retail
• Comprehensive traffic, parking and infrastructure upgrades

Conclusion

For the above reasons, I request that the Planning Proposal be refused as exhibited and substantially revised to achieve a context-appropriate mixed-use outcome.

The 2 towers located on top of the podium appear to be modelled as solid, with no articulation or inclusion of corner or inset balconies as is shown on the architectural drawings. In accordance with the AWES QAM-1-2019 guideline the study model should be fabricated to within 2% accuracy of the architectural drawings, which clearly has not been undertaken in this instance. The lack of detail or inclusion of balconies may have a substantial impact on the measured wind tunnel results as presented in the report along the podium and ground planes. The report does not indicate if there will be any safety concerns especially for the corner balconies, which are generally the most susceptible to issues due to corner wind acceleration effects. Given the site receives no immediate shielding from neighbouring buildings this could in fact be a major issue for certain balcony areas, which would need to be mitigated.
The report indicates strong wind conditions (comfort and safety) for a majority of the area within the central podium section with Points 43 equal to the Safety Criteria (23m/s), P44 and 45 equal to 22m/s. Although these areas are deemed to satisfy the safety criteria is the inclusion of vegetation substantial enough to ensure comfort conditions are met for the majority of the year?
The point layout also does not meet the Recommended Assessment area as outlined in AWES which is to investigate up to a distance of half the building height away from the building boundary. This area should cover points further along Loftus Lane as well as across the rail line. I would advise that the towers are remodelled in accordance with architectural drawings and the test undertaken to ensure that the approved architectural design does not cause adverse wind impacts within and around the site.

This proposal is only good with direct access to Parramatta Road, otherwise, the roads would be too crowded

The heights suggested for the development will not impact Bankstown Airport's Airspace, any cranes utilised to build will most likely intrude into airspace and developers will need to be made aware of the requirements to have cranes assessed.

Please refer to attachment

Dear Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,

I am a resident living near the proposed development site at 17–24 Loftus Crescent, Homebush.

I understand the broader housing objectives and acknowledge that mixed-use development can provide long-term benefits if appropriately managed. However, I have serious concerns about the construction impacts and ongoing neighbourhood impacts given the size of the proposal (including two residential towers up to 27–35 storeys, demolition and basement works, and a concurrent rezoning request).

As a resident living on Level 3 with a balcony facing Loftus Crescent, I expect the most significant impacts to relate to noise, vibration, heavy vehicle movement and parking congestion. I request the Department apply strict conditions to minimise impacts on existing residents and ensure the project can proceed without unacceptable disruption.

1) Construction noise, vibration and disruption (major concern)

The proposal involves demolition, excavation and major construction over a multi-year period. Noise and vibration impacts will be particularly significant for nearby residents on lower levels (including my dwelling).

I request conditions requiring:

strict limits on construction hours including:

clear controls on early morning starts

limits on weekend work

strong restrictions on any out-of-hours works (and clear approval process if needed)

a comprehensive Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) including:

noise monitoring at sensitive residential receivers

vibration monitoring (especially during excavation, piling and concrete works)

clear triggers for action if noise/vibration exceed thresholds

advanced notification to residents for high-impact works (e.g. demolition days, concrete pours, major truck movements)

complaint handling requirements with:

a single point of contact

response time commitments

reporting transparency and corrective actions

2) Dust, air quality and general liveability impacts

Dust and airborne particles from demolition/excavation will significantly affect surrounding residents and balconies, particularly for nearby apartments at lower levels.

I request conditions requiring:

strong dust suppression measures and active monitoring

restrictions during high wind days

ongoing cleaning of surrounding footpaths/roads affected by construction activity

management of airborne emissions during demolition and spoil handling

3) Construction traffic + truck routes (access and safety)

Given the scale of the project, heavy vehicle movements will materially impact local streets and residents’ access.

I request:

a detailed Construction Traffic and Transport Management Plan including:

nominated heavy vehicle routes designed to minimise impacts to residential streets

strict controls to prevent truck queuing, idling, and blocking roads

clear pedestrian safety controls (including around crossings and driveways)

strict timing controls to avoid peak congestion periods where possible

4) Parking congestion and impacts to local residents

This proposal will increase local density significantly and will likely worsen parking pressures both during construction and following occupation.

I request conditions requiring:

a construction workforce parking plan that prevents workers from using local residential street parking

active enforcement measures and signage during the construction period

ongoing traffic/parking assessment for operational impacts, with mitigation requirements if spillover parking impacts become excessive

5) Road capacity, congestion and appropriateness of density increase

The proposed development scale (including the concurrent rezoning for increased building height and floor space ratio) appears excessive given the existing local road network and congestion levels in and around Homebush.

I am concerned the current road and surrounding infrastructure does not appear suitable to accommodate the additional traffic, servicing vehicles, visitors, deliveries and rideshare activity generated by an additional 318 dwellings and associated retail uses.

I request the Department require:

a robust and transparent traffic assessment that reflects realistic peak demand and cumulative impacts

measures to prevent significant worsening of congestion and local access conditions

appropriate mitigation works where impacts are identified

6) Overshadowing and loss of solar access to surrounding buildings

Given the proposed tower heights (up to 27–35 storeys), I am concerned about the potential for unacceptable overshadowing and loss of solar access to surrounding residential buildings and public areas.

I request the Department ensure:

detailed shadow diagrams are provided for key times of year (especially winter)

the design is amended where overshadowing impacts are excessive or unreasonable

building setbacks and massing are adjusted to minimise solar access impacts to existing residents

7) Neighbourhood amenity and street safety

A development of this scale should not reduce the safety or usability of the surrounding public domain during construction.

I request:

safe and clearly separated pedestrian paths during the works

appropriate lighting and safety controls in areas affected by construction hoarding or reduced footpath access

strong management of retail/activation outcomes to ensure amenity is improved without causing nuisance impacts

Closing

In summary, my primary concerns relate to construction noise/vibration, dust, heavy vehicle impacts, parking congestion, and the broader issue of whether the proposed scale is appropriate given existing road capacity and congestion.

I request the Department impose strict, enforceable conditions and (where required) design changes to minimise impacts on neighbouring residents and protect local amenity.

Thank you for considering my submission.

I object to the project in it's current form, because I do not think it includes a sufficient amount of affordable housing given the context of the housing crisis. I am one of the tenants that would be displaced for my home to be demolished and developed into flats. I am not against turning these 5 or so houses into apartments, but it is insulting and inadequate that only 12 of 318 residences are to be designated affordable housing. If we are to address the housing crisis, we need to build housing for people not profit. I am sure the developer would still make a worthwhile amount of money from the project even if it were 100% affordable housing, rather than the measly less than 4% that is currently proposed.

If the following two measures were introduced to the plan, I would support the project
1. Minimum 50% of the dwellings to be affordable housing
2. Priority access to that affordable housing given to my neighbors, the people who will be displaced to make way for this development.

I support the project