10 Dangar St Wickham Mixed-use development

I request consideration of the attached objection which outlines concerns with height, density, traffic, community amenity and social impact .

I wish to object to the proposed 43-storey development in my neighbourhood.

I am not opposed to development or increased housing density in principle. However, this proposal is significantly out of scale with the surrounding built environment and would be disproportionate to the existing character of the area.

A building of this height would place considerable pressure on local infrastructure, including roads, parking, traffic management, and community services. The likely increase in vehicle movements from residents and visitors would add to congestion in an area that is already constrained and not designed to accommodate such a large concentration of people and cars.

While development is important, it should be appropriate to its location and supported by adequate infrastructure. In its current form, I do not believe this proposal achieves that balance.

I respectfully request that Council reject the application or require a substantially reduced building height and scale that is more consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood.

The proposal to construct a 43 story building at the above address is out of character with the closest buildings being 14 story's which are one third in height of the proposed tower. it will spoil the aesthetics of the area so close to the harbour front. Approval has just been given for large developments at Honeysuckle HQ waterfront precinct and Marketown shopping centre, with tallest apartment buildings around 100 metres, not 152 metres. The new developments are within walking distance to the Interchange, which the Government is aiming for, so there will be plenty of accommodation for renters and owner occupiers. The previous Developer was going to build a 14 story apartment block and faced significant water and ground water issues from Newcastle Harbour. Therefore as the proposed 43 story building has 3 basement levels for 215 car parking spaces, hopefully the weight of the building will not stress the existing water seals or cause any unforeseen risks in the years to come. The extra cars will increase traffic congestion as the streets in the vicinity of the proposed building are narrow. The view down the harbour from East to West shows off our beautiful organised city, but will change completely if a 43 story skyscraper is built at the western end so close to the harbour, it will look conspicuous which will not fit with its immediate surroundings at this particular location. I believe 43 story buildings in Newcastle are fine but not in the proposed location, as mentioned in this submission. It would be good to show Premier Minns a 3D visualisation or a scale model of the area and get his thoughts on this matter. In conclusion, I respectfully submit my concerns in this submission.

I am opposed to the size of the construction of this building and the safety issues that will result if it is constructed.
The previous proposal for a similar residential building to those currently in the area, would add to the issues outlined below but not to the scale of this new proposal.
The streets in the direct area of the construction and surrounding street are narrow mostly one way and unable to be widened. The proposed building will only be able to be accessed via Charles and Danger Streets. These two streets are narrow and currently struggle to be safely used in both direction by traffic. Surrounding streets such as Bishopsgate and Station Streets are also one way in sections. All this contributes to traffic congestion and confusion from motorist.
The light rail is a key piece of infrastructure in the future development of Newcastle. Yet currently the only way to access it is via these same narrow streets currently under pressure. I often see cars trying to access the limited pickup and drop off area creating traffic and pedestrian safety issues. Traffic can often back up as far as Hannel Street. This is a busy fast moving high traffic road. Traffic backed up on to this road will only end in disaster.
There is no way to widen any of these Streets and as more people look to use the light rail these issues will grow. To then add traffic of a building this size and including the light to medium sized transport required to service the commercial and hotel services proposed for this construction will only add further to the congestion.
I cannot see sufficient areas designated to meet these loading zone and with a building this size removal vans will be parked and blocking traffic flow on a regular basis.
These issues seem minor but as a person who uses the streets daily the issue is obvious. Large numbers of vehicles, growing pedestrian usage on narrow streets will end up in congestion and serious accidents.
You cannot just continue to build large multi-purpose building of this size in areas that will bloke access to public facilities and knowingly create issues that will put the public at risk.

The design can incorporate green space features and sufficient public space should be appropriate. Appealing streetscape is called for as it is tall building in among existing buildings. Quality construction is required.
The mixture of affordable housing, co-living, residential housing and hotel rooms plus retail spaces will be a difficult design to create a good functioning strata scheme that is fair and manageable.

Please see my attached submission.
Charlotte McCabe

attached

I object to the excessive height of the proposed development.

The project is not in keeping with the Wickham Village plans. Wickham is an old historic village with many miners cottages and narrow, already congested streets. Problems will arise both during construction and after completion, if the development goes ahead.
The height is much higher than any other surrounding buildings in Newcastle. It will cause over shadowing and loss of light, to all the surrounding existing dwellings. It is not in keeping with the suburb.

Also I believe there are many errors and inconsistencies in the planning documents.
The fire planning is not appropriate. The equipment needed to fight a fire in such a tall building does not currently exist in Newcastle. The evacuation procedures have residents evacuation into a lobby not directly to the outside.
The documents talk about Sydney Council and Sydney Water being involved. Wickham is a suburb of Newcastle!

The illustrations of the completed building are misleading. For example to size of the "walkway" between buildings is shown as much larger than it really is so the pictured social activity could not occur.
The sketch of the building surrounded by equally large towers is deceptive, these buildings do not, and may never exist.

Dear assessment officer,
I object to SSD-89869959 for 10 Dangar Street, Wickham.
I work in leasing. I see the difference between housing that is properly managed and housing that looks good on paper but becomes difficult for residents, neighbours and managers once people move in.
This proposal combines several different uses in one very large building: apartments, affordable housing, co-living rooms, hotel rooms, retail, recreation/function uses and basement parking. That mix needs more than general statements about management. It needs clear operating rules before approval.
My particular concern is the co-living and hotel component.
Co-living should not be treated as a loose label. If 99 co-living rooms are proposed, the Department should know who will operate them, what tenancy rules apply, how minimum stay requirements will be enforced, how common areas will be managed, how complaints will be handled, and how the use will be kept distinct from short-stay accommodation.
The same applies to the hotel component. Hotel arrivals, passenger drop-off, luggage, cleaning, waste, servicing and event/function activity all create operational pressure. That pressure will sit beside permanent residents and affordable housing residents.
Please do not leave these issues to later paperwork
In leasing and property management, problems usually appear in the details: noisy common areas, unclear house rules, unmanaged visitors, blocked loading areas, rubbish rooms that do not work, and residents who do not know who is responsible. Once a building is approved and occupied, those problems are hard to unwind.
I ask the Department to refuse the proposal unless the applicant provides a complete co-living plan of management, hotel operations plan, loading and waste plan, resident amenity assessment, and enforceable management conditions before determination.
I also ask that the broader height and density be reduced. A project can support rental supply and still be too large for the site.
Kind regards,

Dear Assessment Officer,
I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham. I live in the area and have two young children, so I'm invested in what happens to our neighbourhood.

The scale of this proposal concerns me, particularly around heritage and townscape. Looking at the plans, I'm not convinced the developers have properly shown how a tower of this size fits with the heritage buildings nearby or what it will do to the character of Wickham and Newcastle West. The relationship between the podium and the tower looks wrong to me — it doesn't feel proportionate to the existing streetscape. This isn't something that should be sorted out later through design development. It's a fundamental question about whether this building should go ahead at all.

On visual impact, I want to see actual evidence of how this will work, not just vague promises about "managing" it. I need to see clear drawings showing what this will look like from different angles, and I need binding commitments about how impacts will be managed — not just operational intentions that might change later.

See letter

I use public transport regularly to get around Newcastle, so I'm paying close attention to how major developments like this one affect the areas I depend on. My concern with the 43-storey proposal at 10 Dangar Street is that the applicant hasn't shown they can actually manage the impacts it will create.

A building of this size in a flood-affected area with limited infrastructure capacity needs serious scrutiny. I'm worried about basement flooding, whether emergency services can actually get in and out, and where people would shelter if something goes wrong. These aren't minor details — they affect whether this is safe for residents and the wider community.

The CPTED issues and how the building will be managed day-to-day still haven't been sorted out properly. Loading and servicing arrangements are also unclear. Without independent review of these things, approving this proposal seems premature.

What I keep seeing in the justification is that it's close to public transport and we need more housing. Those might be true, but they shouldn't override the actual on-the-ground problems. This assessment needs to focus on what the real impacts will be, not just general arguments about housing supply or proximity to the interchange.

see attached

I work in traffic and transport planning, and from that perspective, I can see the application hasn't properly shown how impacts on Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange precinct would be managed. The proponent seems to be relying on proximity to the interchange as justification, but that's not the same as demonstrating the development itself won't create unacceptable pressures.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in environmental management and have spent years looking at how large developments interact with their surroundings. This proposal at 10 Dangar Street concerns me because I don't think it's adequately shown that impacts of this scale can actually be managed.

The main issue I have is around public domain and road reserve. The application seems to depend on outcomes in the public domain, interfaces with road reserves, and through-site links that haven't been properly endorsed or locked in. These aren't minor details that can be sorted out later—they're fundamental to whether this should get approval at all in its current state.

There's also the question of design excellence. What's been submitted doesn't directly show how the proposal will handle these matters. You need clear drawings, proper conditions, and actual operational commitments—not just vague statements about what they intend to do.

Given how large this development is, the assessment needs to be careful and grounded in evidence. The technical risks and public interest issues need to be genuinely resolved, not deferred.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham.

As a civil engineer, I've spent years working on transport and infrastructure projects, so I look at proposals like this and immediately think about how they actually function on the ground. What concerns me here is that the applicant hasn't made a convincing case that this development can work without creating real problems for the area.

My main issue is the parking shortfall. I've reviewed the documentation and the numbers don't add up. A building of this scale will generate demand that the proposed parking can't meet, and that's not just a theoretical problem — it translates into pressure on street parking throughout Wickham and Newcastle West, and added congestion around the Newcastle Interchange. The applicant seems to be relying on assumptions about how many residents won't own cars, but those assumptions aren't grounded in local data or realistic transport behaviour. From a planning perspective, you can't just hope that works out.

There's also the aviation and crane risk issue, which adds another layer of concern about whether this application is genuinely ready for determination.

'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham.

I work as a building manager in the area, and I've got real concerns about whether this application actually demonstrates that a development of this size can work here without causing serious problems for Wickham, Newcastle West, and the Newcastle Interchange precinct.

My main issue is the parking shortfall. This isn't just about whether the building can physically go up — it's about whether the applicant has shown a proper planning outcome that's actually fair and safe. The numbers don't add up when you factor in what the precinct already needs.

As a strata committee member in this area, I see firsthand how our streets function and what happens when systems get overloaded.

My main concern is the hotel pick-up and drop-off operations. The application doesn't adequately address where these vehicles will actually go or how they'll manage the traffic flow on local streets. This isn't just about whether the building can physically be constructed — it's about whether the applicant has properly demonstrated that the impacts on Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange precinct are acceptable.

I'm also troubled by the public domain and road reserve issues that haven't been properly worked through. These gaps suggest the application simply isn't ready for approval yet.

What troubles me most is that this proposal is being assessed in broad strokes rather than on its actual on-the-ground impacts. References to proximity to public transport or general housing supply arguments don't address the specific, practical problems this development will create for residents and businesses already here.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in flood risk management, and I've looked at this proposal for the 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street with real concern about whether the applicant has actually shown they can manage what this scale of building will do to the area.

This site sits in a flood-affected zone with infrastructure that's already stretched. That means we need to be especially careful about basement safety, how people get out in an emergency, and where residents can shelter if water comes through. Those aren't minor details.

What's stuck with me is that basic things remain unresolved. The bicycle and motorcycle parking arrangements aren't sorted, and the stormwater and drainage strategy doesn't feel complete. You can't separate those issues from the flood risk — they're all connected. I can't see how this gets approved responsibly without an independent technical review that actually tests whether the drainage and parking solutions will work when we get the kind of weather events we're seeing more often now.

I'm not against housing in Newcastle. But we can't use housing targets as an excuse to sidestep the real risks — whether that's flood safety, traffic impacts, wind effects, design quality, public space outcomes, or the infrastructure burden on Wickham and Newcastle West. Each of those needs to be genuinely resolved, not managed around.

I'm a student in the area and I have concerns about whether this 43-storey development can actually work without causing serious problems for Wickham and the surrounding precincts.

The streets around Dangar, Charles, and Hannell are already pretty congested with people walking, cycling, cars, and delivery trucks all moving through at the same time. Adding a building this size means a lot more activity in an already tight space.

What really worries me is that the application hasn't properly worked out the loading and servicing arrangements. I can't see how they've addressed basement safety either. These aren't things that should be figured out later through operational plans—they need to be sorted before the project gets approved.

Given how big this development is, I think it's important the decision-makers take a careful, evidence-based approach rather than just accepting what the applicant has put forward.