10 Dangar St Wickham Mixed-use development

serious concerns that need to be addressed before it can move forward.

My main worry is about heritage and townscape. Wickham has real character, and the Newcastle Interchange precinct has heritage items that matter to the area's identity. A building this tall, with the way the podium and tower are being designed, will change how those heritage places look and feel. The application hasn't properly shown how it will manage that impact. This isn't something that can be sorted out later in the design phase—it's fundamental to whether the proposal should be approved at all.

I'm also concerned about the visual impact. Right now the applicant is making broad claims about managing it, but there's no clear evidence. We need actual drawings that show what this will look like from different vantage points, specific conditions that will be enforced, and real commitments about how they'll operate—not just vague statements of intent.

The scale of what's being asked for here is enormous compared to what's currently allowed in the planning framework. Before the community accepts that kind of departure, the applicant needs to provide proper evidence and binding commitments. We shouldn't have to take things on faith.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm writing to object to the 43-storey development proposed at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham. I run a small business in the area and I have real concerns about whether this application should go ahead as it stands.

The main issue for me is the affordable housing component. The public benefit being offered needs to be backed up by actual legal commitments — specifics around how long the affordable units stay affordable, how rents are set, who manages them, and whether what's being offered actually matches the scale of what the developer is getting out of this. Right now it reads too vague. The community shouldn't have to absorb an impact this size on the basis of promises that aren't locked down.

Beyond that, this section of Wickham is already dealing with a lot of pressure. Traffic is heavy, public transport is stretched, and the streets are busier than they used to be. Stacking another massive development on top of what's already happening here adds real cumulative strain. I'm not convinced the assessment has properly factored in what that actually means for the area.

The application keeps pointing to proximity to the interchange and generic talk about housing need. That's not enough. What matters is what this specific building does to Wickham, Newcastle West and the precinct we work in — and I don't think that's been honestly assessed.

Dear Assessment Officer,

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

My main concern is the construction impacts. I don't think the applicant has adequately shown that a building this size can be built without causing real problems for Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange area. It's not just about whether they can technically build it — it's about whether they've actually demonstrated this will be a fair, safe and reasonable outcome for the community.

The construction phase worries me because of how it will affect the precinct while work is happening. On top of that, the hotel pick-ups and drop-offs add another layer of disruption that hasn't been properly thought through. These aren't small issues.

Given how large this proposal is, I think the consent authority needs to take a careful, evidence-based approach here. That means not approving this unless someone independent has properly reviewed these problems and confirmed they can be resolved.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in hospitality here in Wickham, so I'm around the area most days and see how busy it already gets. I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street.

My main concern is the aviation and crane risk. I don't think the application has properly addressed this. It's not enough to say a tower can physically be built—the developer needs to show they've actually worked through the safety implications for the area around it.

Beyond that, I'm also worried about what this height and scale will do to the existing character of Wickham and the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The heritage and townscape issues add to my concerns that this application just isn't ready to be approved as it stands.

I'm not against new housing. We need more of it in the right places. But we shouldn't be trading off genuine safety risks or leaving flood, traffic, wind, and infrastructure problems unresolved just to get buildings up faster.

Please see the attached document for additional information and expansion on the listed points
1) Dead and Inactive Edge Conditions on the Ground Floor and Lack of Passive Surveillance
2) A building so tall that it challenges the natural landscape, Glenrock State Conservation Area, Charlestown and the Great Dividing Ranges
3)Socio-spatial Stratification - Baked in Inequality by Design and Purpose
4)Unequitable Distribution of Affordable Housing in the Region
5)Poor Quality of Submission and Multiple Inconsistencies
6) Lack of Genuine Community Consultation over the Proposed Tallest Building in Newcastle LGA
7)Lack of Acid Sulphate Soil Management and Environmental Risk Assessment
8)Unprecedented Emergency Response Requirements and Reliance on Performance-Based Fire Solutions
9)Misleading Visualisations and Unrealistic Landscape Representation
10) Failure to Deliver Meaningful Public Domain Improvements
11)Need for a Dedicated Community Liaison Officer and Independent Compliance Officer During Construction

1. The visual bulk of the development is out of character to the local area/ design 2. The size will negatively impact the streetscape. 3. It will block views from existing apartments and decrease value. 4. Traffic, further reduced street parking and noise from the size and massive number of occupants. There is already limited parking for workers and residents in the area.

1) Setting Precedent for Future Height Increase that Disregards Local Planning Controls
2) Loss of local Character and Identity
3) Departure from local Planning Controls and Intent
4) Parking shortfall and on-street congestion
5) Socio-Spatial Stratification
6) Poor Quality and Inconsistent Documentation
7) Support for Bulky Goods Storage, but Insufficient in size and capacity
8) Construction Oversight and Community Accountability
9) Inadequate Assessment and Disclosure of Acid Sulphate Soil Risks
10) A Building that exceeds the natural landscape around Newcastle.
11) Potentially Misleading Visualisations and Landscape Representations
12) Failure to Deliver Meaningful Public Domain Improvements
13) Inadequate Community Consultation
14) Emergency Management Risks and Extensive Reliance on Performance Solutions
15) High Concentration of Housing Within a Single Development
Note: Difficulty in using this website and the planning portal to submit, this is delaying community submissions. Also the date of deadline is constantly changing with different numbers that do not correlate in a liner fashion which is misleading. 5 days out it said 26 days until submission.

Please find attached the document that covers the above points.

Collapsing NSW Planning Law in Regional Cities such as Newcastle is an excessive approcah and is unaccceptable as the impact creates an unsafe precedent across what is a liveable fine grain area of the Region.

I work as a rideshare driver around Wickham and Newcastle West, so I'm in the area constantly. I know how congested it gets around Dangar Street, Charles Street, Hannell Street and the Interchange — the pedestrian flows, the cyclists, the vehicles, the delivery trucks. It's already complicated. A development this size needs to prove it won't make the drainage situation worse, and right now it hasn't done that.

The stormwater and drainage documentation doesn't give me confidence that the applicant has actually worked through what happens when you put a 43-storey building in this location. The application seems to kick these issues down the road to future operational plans, which isn't good enough. These problems need to be solved before approval, not after.

I'm also concerned about the broader community infrastructure — schools, transport, local services. The application doesn't make a convincing case that the area can handle this scale of development without unacceptable impacts.

What concerns me most is that the developers haven't shown they can actually manage what this building will bring to Wickham.

This location floods. The infrastructure around here is already stretched. When you've got a tower this size in a flood-affected area, you need to think hard about what happens to people in the basement when water comes, how emergency services get in and out, and where residents shelter if something goes wrong. I don't see that being treated with the seriousness it deserves.

The CPTED issues and management plans are still unresolved. Loading and servicing haven't been properly worked through either. You can't just approve something this big and hope it sorts itself out on the ground.

I'm not against development, but this needs to be assessed on what it will actually do to Wickham and Newcastle West, not just because there's a train station nearby or because we need housing. Those things matter, but they don't override real safety and management questions.

Dear Assessment Officer,

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

As a first home buyer trying to establish myself in this area, I'm genuinely concerned that the application hasn't demonstrated how a tower of this scale can work without creating serious problems for Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange precinct.

My main worry is community infrastructure. This isn't just about whether the building can physically go up—it's about whether the applicant has actually shown this is a fair, safe and workable outcome for the neighbourhood.

The sheer height and scale of what's being proposed makes me think this application isn't ready. Adding 43 storeys to this location raises too many unanswered questions.

My concern is straightforward: a 43-storey tower at this location seems completely disconnected from what's already been approved for Wickham. The height and floor space ratio are way beyond what the current planning framework allows, even with the incentives that are supposed to apply. I haven't seen any proper justification for why this particular site deserves such an exceptional uplift. The application just doesn't make the case strongly enough for the community to accept this kind of departure from the rules.

There's also the practical issue of bike and motorcycle parking. This stretch of Wickham already struggles with congestion — you've got traffic, public transport, pedestrians, cyclists, and new developments all competing for space. Adding another major tower without a solid plan for active transport parking is asking for trouble.

Before anyone even thinks about approving something this big, the applicant needs to put forward much clearer evidence to back up their proposal. We also need independent peer review and proper enforceable conditions built into any approval. The community shouldn't be expected to accept this without those safeguards in place.

The proposed tower complex is disproportionately high in relation to the surrounding natural and building environment. It will add vehicular and pedestrian traffic in excess of that planned for in the local vicinity. Vehicular access off Hannell St is not proposed to be enhanced to take into account the increased flows and pedestrian safety (especially on Bishopsgate and Grey Sts). Public amenities are minimal and remain at the sole discretion of the developer/owner into the future. There needs to be a clear and binding plan to ensure cycle access and pathways are not blocked or hindered by this development and thus remove or diminish one of the transport modes this project aspires to be near to justify its stepping outside the normal planning rules. A building matching the nearby towers would be more acceptable. Finally, given Newcastle’s recent geological history what foundational and design/structural features (eg dampers) have been required to mitigate earthquake risk?

I live in an apartment nearby and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street on design grounds.

The design excellence pathway just isn't resolved. The applicant hasn't submitted a complete Alternative Design Excellence Strategy, and they haven't properly responded to the issues raised by the State Design Review Panel. This isn't something that can be sorted out later during detailed design — it's fundamental to whether this proposal should be approved at all.

Construction impacts are another major concern. The application contains vague statements about managing these, but there's nothing concrete. I need to see actual drawings, specific conditions, and real operational commitments that show how construction will be handled day-to-day. Right now it's all broad intentions with no substance behind them.

I'm also concerned about whether a building of this scale can work without unacceptable impacts on Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange precinct. The assessment should be based on what the development will actually do, not just on the fact that it's near a train station or that we need more housing.

I rent in Wickham and I'm worried this application hasn't properly shown that a 43-storey development can actually work here without causing serious problems for the area, Newcastle West, and the Newcastle Interchange.

What really concerns me is the public domain and road reserve situation. The proposal seems to depend on outcomes involving public spaces, road interfaces and links through the site, but none of this looks properly locked in or agreed to. These aren't small details that can get sorted out later—they're fundamental to whether this thing should even get approved as it stands.

I'm also not satisfied with the design excellence side of things. The material needs to actually show how this will be managed, not just say it will be. That means clear drawings, binding conditions, and real operational commitments—not vague statements about trying to do something.

Given how massive this proposal is, the consent authority needs to be careful and base decisions on solid evidence, not assumptions.

I've lived in Wickham for several years now, and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street in its current form.

My main concern is what this will do to traffic and road safety in the area. The access arrangements don't seem to have properly addressed the safety issues I can see coming — things like driveway sightlines, the heavy vehicle movements that will happen regularly, and how pedestrians and cyclists are meant to navigate around it all. Dangar Street functions as a civic street, and I'm not convinced the proposal has shown it can handle this level of development without creating real safety problems. We shouldn't have to accept that kind of risk without solid evidence that it's manageable.

I'm also concerned about flooding. This part of Wickham already feels the squeeze from traffic, public transport, pedestrians, cyclists, and all the new development happening. Adding another major building here without properly addressing flood risk doesn't sit right with me.

Dear Assessment Officer,

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

I live in Newcastle West and I'm genuinely concerned about whether this development can work without causing real problems for the area. The scale of what's being proposed needs proper planning, not just approval because it can technically fit on the site.

My main concern is parking. A building this size will need a lot of parking spaces, and from what I've seen in the application, the numbers don't add up. The shortfall will just push parking problems onto our local streets. Newcastle West already deals with parking pressure, and this will make it worse. It's not enough to say the building fits, the applicant needs to show that parking can actually be managed properly.

There's also the issue of aviation and crane risk that makes me think this application isn't ready to be approved yet. These are safety matters that need proper independent review.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm writing to object to SSD-89869959 for the 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street, Wickham. I've lived in Honeysuckle for several years now and I'm genuinely concerned this proposal hasn't properly demonstrated how a building of this size can operate without creating serious problems for the surrounding area.

My main worry is the hotel pick-up and drop-off arrangements. Right now the application hasn't shown where all these vehicles are going to go or how they'll move through Wickham and Newcastle West without causing congestion and safety issues. It's not enough to just say the building is technically feasible — we need to see that the applicant has actually thought through how guests will get in and out of the place day to day.

The public domain and road reserve concerns only reinforce this for me. The whole thing feels rushed and incomplete.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I've lived in Newcastle for over fifteen years, and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street Wickham because I don't think the application has properly addressed how a building of this size would work in our area.

The streets around Dangar, Charles, and Hannell are already busy. You've got pedestrians, cyclists, delivery trucks, and people using the Interchange all trying to move around the same small network. Adding this much density without clear answers about how loading and servicing would actually operate on the ground doesn't make sense to me.

What concerns me most is that the applicant hasn't shown convincing detail on loading and servicing arrangements or how basement safety would be managed. These aren't minor details that can be sorted out later through operational plans — they're fundamental to whether this development can work here without creating serious problems. I need to see this sorted before any approval is given, not promised as future conditions.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street. I've lived in Honeysuckle for several years now, and I'm genuinely concerned about what this project could mean for our area.

My main worry is the flood risk. I don't think the application has adequately addressed how a building of this size would cope with flooding, or how it might affect flood patterns in Wickham and Newcastle West. We're not far from the water here, and I need to see proper evidence that this development won't make things worse for us residents.

Beyond that, I'm troubled by how this sets a precedent. Wickham has a particular character, and allowing a 43-storey building represents a huge departure from what we've had. I'm not against development, but I think the applicant needs to demonstrate much more convincingly that the scale is justified.

The issues around traffic and road safety haven't been resolved satisfactorily either. Before asking the community to accept such a significant change to our neighbourhood, the applicant should provide clearer evidence and binding commitments that address these concerns properly.