More options for redevelopment of Horsley Park, Cecil Park
Amid fanfare and a petition from residents, Fairfield Council has released two additional options exploring the possible redevelopment of Horsley Park and Cecil Park.
Amid fanfare and a petition from residents, Fairfield Council has released two additional options exploring the possible redevelopment of Horsley Park and Cecil Park.
Options D (medium density) and E (high density) come about a month after three blueprints were released in mid-November. Options A, B and C proposed building from 12,248 to 24,482 homes, with a majority coming from multi-dwellings such as townhouses and apartments.
The new plans mark a soft departure from the originals. The main difference has to do with the removal of the Boulevard, a main road running through both suburbs. Instead, in plans D and E, existing roads would be expanded and upgraded.
Otherwise both of the plans pick and borrow from the existing three. From Option A, they borrow a low-density approach to development in the areas of Horsley Park that are affected by the airport flight-path. But in place of agribusiness and estate homes, they propose 4000 sqm residential lots.
Beyond these two changes, Option D is almost identical to Option A. It even proposes building the same number of homes, from 12,248 to 17,050.
And although Option E eases away from commercial development in Horsley Park, it proposes building large residential apartments around the town centre of Cecil Park. This would yield from 15,719 to 24,817 homes, with 30 to 38 per cent coming from the large apartment buildings.
Option E would also lead to the development of a train station, like Option C, connecting Cecil Park to Parramatta and the nearby Aerotropolis.
All five plans propose how the two semirural suburbs could be developed. However, a sixth option is on the table. The suburbs can be left as they are; with their 2600 residents working farms and living in homes and estate houses.
So far residents have met the prospect of development with mixed emotions. Of the dozen who spoke to the Advance, some welcome it – provided it comes with an investment in infrastructure. Others want nothing to do with it. A petition against the development has been launched.
The two additional plans come after speaking to the area’s residents and landowners, Mayor Frank Carbone said.
“We have presented these new options because it is what the community is telling us they want,” he said.
“I invite the community to look at these two additional options and to provide their feedback direct to Council.
“This is our community, we live here, and we all deserve to have a say in its future.”
At the time of writing, Fairfield Council has received 60 responses offering feedback.