I believe that the infrastructure in Homebush has not caught up with the sharp increase of population. At the moment, there are already 3 new apartment buildings in the making, and now they want to build 2 more towers with 318 apartments. I am assuming 318 new families, plus the new families in the other 3 large, brand new apartment buildings, will move in those apartments within the next few years, then which school will have enough capacities to support all these kids, definitely not Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. The burden will be carried by all the public schools in the Homebush area.

Then we need to think about roads, hospitals, childcare, public transport, public spaces and shopping centres that could fit the needs of all these new families. All of which we are not yet have. And when push comes to shove, when inflations plus economic downturn plus high interest rate created a perfect storm, they blame on immigrations right away. Not on poor planning of infrastructure or years of bad policies and definitely not on greed.

I understand the effort of trying to build 12 affordable housing units is commendable. However, if we don't do anything about the economy, if we just go on trade war without thinking of the affect on the common people, then the housing problem cannot be solved, even with 10 millions new affordable housing units.

I implore you all to take a good, hard look at the lesson of Marsden Park - a suburban infrastructure planning nightmare, where schools are overcrowded and the roads are filled with traffic jams. These problems will cause chronic stress, which will then put more pressure on the healthcare systems in the long run.

If you want to build this complex, please make sure you have the correct infrastructure for the new wave of people. This will reduce overall stress for everyone. I just want that one day, Homebush will be as beautiful as Burwood or Eastwood.

The area is already congested with too many apartments with insufficient space for parking and infrastructure. The traffic is horrendous and is already terrible with multiple businesses such as Crash Claims and other automotive shops which block the roads.

What the area needs is more green space, more parks and improved traffic and parking conditions. Furthermore, all apartments in the area are low rise buildings with most around 7 or 8 storeys. The suggested project is 27-35 storeys which will affect the current aesthetics of the neighbourhood, block our views and cause further congestion to the area.

The local infrastructure cannot support another 400+ residents in the area. Please tell us where everyone is going to park considering each unit comes with minimal car spaces, and the businesses in the area already take up our street parking.

The local Homebush train station is considered a small station with minimal trains on their timetable. This clearly has not been factored into this proposed addition of all these “new residents”. Rather than focusing on building as many units as possible for a cash grab, think of the current residents and how this project will affect the neighbourhood.

I highly oppose to this project as it needs to be either halted until the above factors have been resolved, and at a minimum should be downsized to a low rise apartment like the rest of the neighbourhood.

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