Mixed Use Development, Corner of Union and Kenrick Streets, The Junction

The height of the development is not in keeping with the nature of the village type shopping precinct.
It is a very old historic suburb that offers many amenities to the locals and visitors alike who prefer a smaller and quieter experience.
The car movements and parking requirements for 38 apartment owners will change the nature of the area.
There are currently several shop fronts with no tenants thus more commercial tenancies will increase the problem.
The development is only providing 2 affordable dwellings for 15 years, not really much.

I strongly object to the project as it will drastically change The Junction Village precinct and turn it into a growing metropolis. The local residents live in this area because of the ‘small village’ feel. We do not want high rise apartments, we do not want an increase in number of residents and we do not want more congestion. Keep high rise apartments & congestion in the city for the people who actually want to live like that. Keep The Junction as the small quiet suburb that we moved here for.

This development is another example of a developer using the HDA’s SSD process to side-step the local government requirements to achieve maximum profit to the detriment of the surrounding local community. Having said that, please find below specific areas where the proposed development not only does not meet local government but also the HDA SSD requirements.

The proposed two affordable housing apartments does not meet the SSD requirements where a concurrent rezoning is sought, i.e. “the proponent should exceed the [affordable housing] requirements already in place”.

In applying for spot rezoning the applicant does not provide sufficient justification for the significant height (14 metres to 30 metres) and density (FSR 2:1 to 3:5:1) increases in terms of exceeding the Newcastle LEP standards and fails to demonstrate that the LEP “development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary.”

The number of dwellings proposed in this development is not only less than the number originally proposed in the applicant’s EOI but is also under the HDA SSD original requirement of 40 dwellings and the HDA SSD’s current requirements of 100 dwellings.

My objections are:
The size of the project is too large for the area.
The height is more than twice the current zoning allowance.
The area or floor space ratio is almost twice the current allowance.
The length of time for the construction and the disruption caused in this busy shopping area, opposite a school, will be excessive for this major project - compared with a project that meets current zoning allowances. The project will cause ongoing traffic and people congestion to the area - and change the overall environment of The Junction.

1. The proposed height increase and overshadowing of the project is unacceptable.
Analysis of the Overshadowing and Solar Access for the development (EIS Clause 8.3.1) stipulates the impact of overshadowing on a number of dwellings situated in the Glebe Road Federation Cottages Heritage Conservation Area.
The impact of overshadowing will be exacerbated should future adjoining redevelopment be undertaken.
This development envisions future adjoining redevelopment at similar height as evident by the concrete/block/brick walls planned at the boundary interface with adjoining premises.
Granting approval for increasing the height of this development will provide strong support for granting height increase for any future adjoining redevelopments.
As a property owner in the Glebe Road Federation Cottages Heritage Conservation Area, we are limited in building adjustments to our property to obtain access to the sun due to Heritage Conservation constraints.
2. Visual impact on the visual character of the streetscape is unreasonable.
The development envisions that future redevelopment will be at the same proposed level as this development as there is no provision of any setbacks of the buildings at the boundary with adjoining premises and the concrete/block/brick boundary interface.
The concrete/block/brick boundary interface will be an unreasonable visual impact. The impact would be reduced if the development height remains at its current level. Developers wanting to increase the height of current development envelopes should locate their development to areas already approved for their desired height such as Newcastle West or Marketown.
3. The scale of the development will have an unacceptable impact on off-site parking in adjoining streets.
Although the development caters for a number of carparks for residents and commercial activities, we anticipate that there will be an overflow of vehicles that exceed the proposed on-site parking provisions. The anticipated overflow of vehicles will put pressure on the already congested parking spaces within The Junction precinct. Furthermore, illegal parking in restricted parking zones and across local resident and business driveways/laybacks is a problem in The Junction precinct that will be exacerbated with the anticipated additional overflow parking from the development.
4. Poor community engagement: As a property owner in the Glebe Road Federation Cottages Heritage Conservation Area (55metres south of the development), the only direct correspondence received in relation to this development was the "Notice of Exhibition" dated 19 June 2026. The EIS Appendix K stated that stakeholders were identified and appropriate engagement techniques were employed (Table 2). No emails or letters have been received in relation to pop-up sessions, web page, online survey, letterbox drops and consultation with council officers via a Pre-DA meeting all that were to be undertaken between February and March 2026. There is no evidence of any appropriate engagement techniques in Appendix K.

In summary, this development is not suitable for this area of Newcastle, it's excessive and would set a precedent for future redevelopment that would detract from the village character that The Junction is renowned. The shadowing of the rezoning negatively impacts the Glebe Road Federation Cottages Heritage Conservation Area. We strongly object to this rezoning proposal.

I strongly object to the proposed development as it constitutes a gross overdevelopment of the site and is fundamentally inconsistent with the established character, scale, and planning objectives of The Junction.

The proposal seeks to increase the permissible building height from 14 metres to approximately 30 metres — more than double the existing height limit. Such an extraordinary departure from the planning controls is excessive, unjustified, and completely out of scale with the surrounding built environment. Height limits exist to protect neighbourhood character, manage density, preserve amenity, and provide certainty for the community. Approving a development of this magnitude would undermine the integrity of those planning controls and create a dangerous precedent for future developments seeking similar exceptions.

The Junction is recognised and actively promoted as a coastal village precinct. Its appeal lies in its human scale, heritage character, low-rise streetscape, and welcoming village atmosphere. The proposed seven-storey building is entirely incompatible with these defining qualities and would irrevocably erode the character that residents, visitors, and local businesses value.

The proposed building is grossly disproportionate to the surrounding development and would dominate the streetscape. It fails to transition appropriately to neighbouring two-storey buildings and demonstrates poor urban design. Rather than enhancing the precinct, it would overwhelm it.

The visual impact is unacceptable. From Glebe Road, pedestrians and motorists would be confronted by the imposing rear elevation of a seven-storey building, presenting as a large blank wall that would be both visually intrusive and wholly inconsistent with the established village streetscape. This is an inappropriate design outcome that would significantly detract from the amenity and appearance of the area.

The proposal would also intensify the already critical parking problems experienced throughout The Junction. Additional demand generated by residents, visitors, and commercial patrons would inevitably overflow into surrounding streets, placing further pressure on limited on-street parking. Existing residents and businesses already struggle with inadequate parking during both daytime and evening periods. This development would worsen those impacts and further reduce the accessibility and viability of the village centre.

This proposal prioritises development yield over sound planning outcomes and community amenity. It disregards the very planning controls that exist to protect the unique character of The Junction and fails to demonstrate that such a substantial variation is in the public interest.

For these reasons, I urge NSW Government to reject this application. Approval would not only result in an inappropriate and excessive development on this site but would also set a precedent that threatens the long-term character, integrity, and liveability of The Junction village precinct.

- Do not support the design and request to increase permitted height of buildings to more than double the existing permitted height
- Do not believe the building fits the aesthetic of the area and will shadow over current buildings
- Questions on how construction will be handled in terms of road / pedestrian impact in a busy neighbourhood area
- Questions on ongoing road / pedestrian impact in busy neighbourhood area
- Do not believe they should be allowed to be excluded from affordable housing contributions - why should this be allowed
- Note that they have said there would be two affordable housing apartments for first 15-years - what happens to these after this period (in particular to current tenants at that time)

I support the project, I believe it will significantly improve housing affordability and availability in the area.

I would however like to see the number of units and storeys significantly increased as well as units set aside for essential workers.

The height of the project is out of order. There are height guidlines put in place and should be adhered to. The proposed height is double the existing allowable height for that area. the development is also too dense for the space provided in this building,
I strongly object to the proposed height.

The site is in a local small shopping and residential area with a primary school directly opposite.
The existing height of 14 meters should be maintained as there are many areas closer to the city where the existing height limits are 30 meters and have existing and under construction unit complexes.
It would greatly affect the area because of its history and the existing low level buildings that are in place.
Approval of a height increase would open the flood gates for other developments in an already congested part of the junction.
It would have a major effect an already congested parking precinct.
I am in favor of the project being built within the existing height limits.

This development is too tall for the surrounding area.
It will have a major undesirable visual impact on the Junction as all other buildings are low rise in keeping with the local shopping precinct.
It is too close to the Catholic school on the corner that already has significant parking issues when it is pick up and drop off time each school day.

I would like to raise several concerns regarding the proposed high rise development and increase density living that will impact on the parking and road safety within the area.
1. During construction who will be responsible for enforcing speed limits of 40kms per hour in Bruce street as the closure of Union and Kenrick Street will undoubtably redirect traffic through Bruce Street.
2. It does not appear there will be on street parking available during the construction or after on Kenrick Street which will impact on nearby residential areas to accommodate increase requirements for parking in the area. Does this mean it will become restricted parking or ticketed parking in the future?
3. There are 3 school zones in the area has any notification or arrangements been made to accommodate increase number of students with increase high density living?
4. What consideration has been made for local small business owners and the impact that the construction will have on their business during the build?
5. With the relocation of the Newcastle Permanent Building Society there will no longer be any ATM access in the area outside of the Junction Hotel and The Junction Village Shopping Centre each of these ATM's charge significant fees for use.

This is exactly the type of project we need to be delivering in Newcastle. High quality buildings wth street activation. We need to increase the density of the city, attract employers and make it more vibrant.

This development is at odds with Newcastle’s height restrictions and sets a dangerous precedent for building heights; particularly given that its location is outside the CBD. The majority of Novocastrians don’t want to live in a densely overpopulated city; we’d move to Sydney if that were our aim. This will ruin the village atmosphere.

I object to the proposed SSD-89050708 for a mixed use development for corner of Union and Kenrick Streets, The Junction in regard to the following.
Spot Rezoning - The applicant fails to provide adequate justification for the significant increase in height (14m to 30m) & density ((FSR 2:1 to 3.5:1) in excess of the Newcastle LEP standards and, as required under NLEP 4.6 Exceptions to development standards (3)(a), fails to demonstrate that "compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances".
Number of dwellings - The proposed number of dwellings is less than stated in the applicant's State Significant Development EOI, is less than that the 40 required under the original HDA SSD criteria and significantly less than the current HDA SSD criteria of 100 dwellings.
Number of affordable housing dwellings - The proposal for only 2 affordable housing apartments fails to meet the HDA SSD requirements that "where a concurrent rezoning is sought, the affordable housing offering from the proponent should exceed the requirements already in place in a council or State policy, so that the affordable housing rate is proportional to the level of uplift sought " and "affordable housing offering demonstrates a commitment to align to NSW Affordable Housing Ministerial Guidelines".
Estimated Development Cost - Cost of the proposal of $49 million is less than the $ 60 million required under the current HDA SSD criteria.
In general, the proposal is too high and too large in the context of the site, fails to justify the height and density exceedances, does not meet the current criteria for HDA SSD status and should not be supported.

As a local resident this application is overwhelming not only in the size but also in the excessive expansive of associated features such as pressure on parking and local traffic.
If a proposed 38 units are to be built we can at least assume there will be at least 38 additional vehicles committed to local parking. This only assumes one vehicle per unit which is often not the case with more being the situation as well as a need for visitor and trade parking. It is not clear how many parking spaces are included in this application from what I have seen. In addition, tennants of the proposed retail and commercial will add additional pressure to parking as will indeed any extra visitors/clients to the area.
The Junction is already a heavy traffic area due to current businesses,a heavily used supermarket as wellas a transit hub for traffic from the east to Merewether and west along Glebe Road.
The scale of the project is far in excess of any neighbouring or local buildings of 3-4 stories and a proposed height increase from 14m to 30m would be oppressive.
Kenrick and Union Streets are very busy public roads so access to and from this proposed development, both during development and afterwards by tennants, would only cause further very significant traffic problems.
Zoning applications presumably are in place to allow orderly and respectable development for the local population and businesses so I respectively submit that I do not consider that an application for a development of this size allows this to occur

Our client, The Owners - Strata Plan 83416 (9 Kenrick Street, The Junction) requests that a condition of approval be that a dilapidation report be conducted on 9 Kenrick Street, The Junction prior to any works commencing and that report be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced independant consultant. Our client also requests that the report be submitted to lot owners and the Owners Corporation for comment/agreement in order to establish whether any damage occurs during construction due to vibration and lateral support removal along the joint boundary.
Our client is concerned about construction access, parking, traffic, noise, dust and general disruption to customer access to their businesses which could have significant implications and ask that these impacts to neighbouring businesses be taken into consideration and plans put in place to minimise the disruption to neighbouring and adjoining businesses.