10 Dangar St Wickham Mixed-use development

I object to a 43 storey development in Newcastle regardless of the mixed use proposal. Recent developments above the originally planned 9 storeys for the Newcastle city area are literally destroying the skyline of Newcastle. The current city towers are an eyesore on approach to the city from surrounding hillsides and these apartment towers have spoiled the city’s low level appeal and appearance forever. No more uninterrupted views to the ocean and harbour from the surrounding area and obviously for neighbouring apartment dwellers and lack of privacy for house occupants underneath the towers. Overshadowing is already occurring from existing apartment towers over Newcastle Beach and that is a major issue that has been allowed by the government. Very soul destroying for the once pleasing city fabric that it will become a cold and overshadowed wind tunnel in the city precinct and this includes Wickham. Parking scarcity resulting from apartment block developments has destroyed the potential to bring commercial operators and small businesses into the downtrodden Hunter Street in particular part of the city as shoppers have nowhere to park and especially not for free close by to shops.

I have a few grave concerns re this submission, and I feel they have major importance to the proposed development.
Already the traffic on Hannell St and all surrounding smaller streets connecting to this project are used to capacity. To add that many more businesses and residences to the property would be a huge overkill. Parking in the area is also a major concern as it is already limited for the current needs.
Besides the traffic and parking problems, what about the availability and effectiveness of all the utilities required not just for this project but for the whole surrounding areas. Is the infrasturcture there - I doubt it.
Another concern is that already 3 or 4 other developers have had to abort their plans for this site at least partly because of the water ingress onto the site and this proposal is certainly much bigger than anything else that has been proposed so there has to be some risk there.
We already, in the Newcastle West area,have quite a few high rises and even 2 more nearing completion nearby. This new proposal would even out-rise those which is now definitely bordering on overkill in this area.
Development in our city is certainly acceptable but not such an overkill in this limited access and already over utilized area.
Let's make sure we get things right in our beautiful city - not just overkill in areas already stretched.

This project does not meet the requirements of the Wickham Master Plan. This plan has taken a lot of planning by the community. Community needs must be met. The building is not in keeping with the other developments in the area.

I believe that 43 storeys is out of character for Wickham area. Something of similar height to the surrounding area developments would be far more suitable.

The fact this development has the title of state significance should not allow it to disregard the affect this project will have on the Wickham area in general.
: This project appears poorly planned in regard to providing enough car parking for the number of proposed residents
: Wickham is already challenged in the amount of available street parking and the proposed development has nowhere near enough parking allocations for the number of beds planned in the development.
: Concerns over the height of the building compared with the previous development Bowline which fell through apparently due to the water table issues have these been addressed?
: Lack of clarity in regard to what co living refers to
: Who will the affordable housing be made available to especially with the proposed linking in of a large hotel facility
:Affect of a five floor hotel on general living in what is to be called the Throsby Village
:No clarity in regard to opening hours along with the parking challenges again causing overload in the area.
:Lack of clarity as to what brown communal space refers to
:Lack of clarity as to the affect of the water table issues and what the plan is to address this
:What style of hotel is actually planned for this site.
:The affect of the occupancy of the building on the current interchange and the challenges currently experienced through the number of homeless people this will attract
:Rational behind the planning of this tall building and its affect on the general visual feeling of Newcastle
: Added traffic on Charles st and the Wickham area in general
:Where is this covered in the planning document

Too high
Too many people
Too few car parks
Too much anti social behaviour in the area

see attached

I live in the Wickham community which has worked collaboratively with the City of Newcastle over many years to develop the Wickham Community Infrastructure Plan and the Wickham Master Plan to guide development in the local area. There is currently a 70 metre height control, and the proposed development is more than double this height at 150m. I am concerned about the negative effects on infrastructure, traffic, overshadowing and residential amenity. Wickham has a strong maritime and industrial identity/history which is being eroded by bland, generic developments such as this. Please allow the area to follow its current agreed plans. We don't want the access to and amenity with the waterfront to be blocked. If the height of this development is allowed, it will open the flood gates to further developments of this nature. There is already a traffic problem with Throsby Street being the only exit from the precinct in a southbound direction. This is a narrow road being used by many different types of commercial vehicles.

The buiding is not supported by external infrastructure in the surrounding areas.All pedestrian access is poor and inaccessible for anyone with a disability or mobility need.There is already a hightened problem with violence and vandelism in the area.There are no considerations for the human rights needs of the communal living space.Street lighting in adjacent areas is poor with liimited foodpath accessibility

I object to the proposed mixed-use development at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham on the grounds that it exceeds established planning controls and will have unacceptable impacts on the surrounding community.
My primary concern is the excessive height of the proposed development.
A proposal that significantly exceeds planning controls undermines the integrity of the planning framework and sets an undesirable precedent for future developments seeking similar variations.
The scale of the development is also likely to create significant traffic and transport impacts.
A development of this size will generate additional vehicle movements from residents, visitors, commercial tenants, service vehicles and deliveries, increasing congestion and placing further strain on local infrastructure.
In addition, the scale and bulk of the proposed building are out of keeping with the intended character of the area, and will create overshadowing and privacy concerns for neighbouring buildings.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the application be refused in its current form or substantially amended to comply with applicable planning controls and to address its impacts on traffic, infrastructure, local character and residential amenity.

I work in project marketing and understand the importance of bringing new housing to market. I also understand that buyers are increasingly sensitive to design quality, building management, public space, transport access and long-term confidence in a precinct.
That is why I object to the proposal as currently lodged.
Housing supply is not the whole test
A project can add dwellings and still fail the planning merit test. The Department should not accept the argument that proximity to transport automatically justifies a 43-storey tower with FSR around 14.2:1.
If a project is asking for a permanent uplift in height and floor space, the public benefit should be equally clear and durable. Affordable housing should be legally secured. Public-domain works should be usable, sunny enough, wind-comfortable, safe and maintained. Design excellence should be complete before approval, not treated as a later formality.
The proposal may be marketed one day as a major gateway project. If so, it should meet a high standard now.
What should happen
The Department should refuse the current scheme. If the applicant wants to pursue the site, it should come back with a reduced building, a clear public-benefit package, completed design excellence material, and independent review of wind, flood, traffic, servicing, visual impact and overshadowing.
Any revised proposal should be re-exhibited if the changes are material. People should be able to comment on the actual version proposed for approval, not on an earlier version that is later changed behind the scenes.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew

view objection doc

I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street Wickham. As an Islington resident, I'm directly affected by what happens in this area.

My main concern is that the application hasn't properly dealt with loading and servicing. The streets around Dangar, Charles, and Hannell are already congested with pedestrians, cyclists, delivery vehicles and service traffic. Adding a building this size will make that worse, but the applicant hasn't shown how they'll actually manage it day-to-day.

The basement safety issues also worry me. These aren't minor details that can be sorted out later through operational plans. They need to be worked through properly before anyone approves this.

I don't think the application makes a convincing case that a development of this scale can operate without causing real problems for Wickham, Newcastle West, and the whole Interchange precinct. The applicant needs to do the detailed work upfront, not leave it as a condition to be figured out after approval.

I object - see attached

I run a small business in the area and I'm concerned that the application hasn't properly shown how a development of this scale can work without causing real problems for Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange precinct.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in retail here in Wickham, and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street.

I don't think the application has properly shown that a building this size can work without causing serious problems for Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange area.

My main worry is wind. The wind tunnel testing found real safety issues on the upper-level balconies, and from what I can see, the proposed fixes still need more work to verify they actually work. I'm not comfortable with the community accepting this kind of risk without stronger proof that it's been solved properly.

There's also the issue of how the building and the ground-level spaces will be managed. Crime prevention and safety matter, especially in this part of Wickham where we're already dealing with a lot of traffic, buses, pedestrians, cyclists and other new construction. Adding a 43-storey tower needs more than just hoping it'll work out.

To whom it may concern,
I object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street because I believe the scale and intensity of the proposal will negatively impact the long-term liveability and character of Wickham. I own a unit in close proximity that will be effected by this development, not only during it’s construction, also when implemented.

While housing growth is important, developments should be proportionate to surrounding infrastructure and community capacity.
My concerns include:
• excessive height and density relative to nearby development;
• increased traffic congestion and construction disruption;
• pressure on public infrastructure and pedestrian areas;
• increased noise, servicing and delivery activity;
• and the long-term impacts associated with combining hotel, co-living and residential uses within one tower.
• and the use of prime real estate along the harbor for housing projects while at the same time trying to promote the area as a tourist destination.
I am concerned that the proposal introduces a substantial transient population component without clearly demonstrating:
• long-term management arrangements;
• security and operational governance;
• community support mechanisms;
• or meaningful public infrastructure improvements proportionate to the scale of the development.
The application should place greater emphasis on balanced city planning outcomes and protection of community amenity rather than maximum development yield.
I believe a lower-scale development could still contribute significant housing while better supporting long-term community wellbeing and neighbourhood character.

Traffic congestion and lack of serviceability to the influx of new residents is a major issue that no current resident wants.

Communal living and kitchen is outlined without a satisfatory management standard for the shared living.

This 1970s Gold Coast inspired eyesore will be a blight on the Newcastle waterfront offering nothing but a poor example of inclusivity for affordable and diverse housing by having separate foyers for the housing types and substandard design of units with privacy and overcrowding issues. Class division! Offers no amenity for the community. This is not supported through council’s proper planning process under the LEP. Will be an issue for parking (the options cited are inaccurate), traffic congestion, wind tunnels on surrounding buildings, overshadowing and is not cohesive with current and planned surrounding buildings or Wickham Masterplan. It needs to be built within the Height and FSR limits in the LEP for a well designed city that supports liveability not slums existing in bad architecture.