I work as a delivery driver around Wickham and Newcastle West, and I've got real concerns about whether this 43-storey development can actually be managed properly.

The scale of what's being proposed just doesn't match what the application shows. There's no solid evidence that impacts on the area can be kept to acceptable levels. This isn't just about having a big building — it's about whether the systems to run it safely are actually in place.

What worries me most is the location itself. It's flood-affected and already pushing the limits of what the infrastructure can handle. When you add basement levels, emergency access, and shelter arrangements into that mix, you need to be really careful about the risks. I don't see that caution reflected in what's been submitted.

The CPTED and management plan is still unresolved. The loading and servicing arrangements aren't clear either. These aren't minor details — they're fundamental to how the building would actually operate day-to-day. Without proper independent review of these issues, this shouldn't go ahead.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in the area around Dangar Street and see firsthand how the precinct operates day to day. I'm writing to object to this 43-storey development because I don't think the application has properly addressed the stormwater and drainage impacts.

The streets around here already deal with a lot of traffic and pedestrian movement. Adding a building of this size will put serious pressure on systems that are already stretched. But the application hasn't given us clear evidence that the stormwater and drainage can actually handle it. They've basically said they'll sort it out later through operational plans, and that's not good enough.

The same goes for community infrastructure. These aren't minor details that can be worked through after approval — they need to be resolved now, as part of the decision-making process.

If this development is going to happen, the applicant needs to show concrete evidence that the drainage will work and commit to specific outcomes in writing. Vague assurances and conditions to be figured out down the track don't give me confidence that this has been properly thought through.

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

My main concern is around stormwater and drainage. The application hasn't convinced me that the systems proposed can actually handle what a development this size will generate. We already see water management issues in this part of Wickham when we get heavy rain, and adding a massive building like this without solid proof it won't make things worse feels like a real risk.

I'm also worried about community infrastructure more broadly. The area around Dangar Street and the Interchange is already busy with pedestrians, cyclists, delivery vehicles and service movements. A 43-storey tower is a huge departure from what's currently there, and the application just hasn't shown adequately that the existing services and facilities can cope.

What concerns me most is that these critical issues — stormwater, drainage, and infrastructure — seem to be getting pushed off to "operational plans" down the track. That's not good enough. These need to be resolved properly before approval, not left as problems to sort out later.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work in hotel accommodation here in Newcastle, and I've got real concerns about whether this development can actually be managed properly.

A 43-storey building at this scale needs to demonstrate it won't create unacceptable impacts on Wickham, Newcastle West and the surrounding precinct. The application just hasn't shown that convincingly. I'm not seeing how the operational side of something this big gets handled in practice.

What worries me most is that this site is in a flood-affected area with already stretched infrastructure. The basement safety, emergency access, and what happens if people need to shelter during an event — these aren't minor details. They need to be treated with real caution, not glossed over.

There are also unresolved questions around CPTED and how the building will actually be managed day-to-day, plus the loading and servicing logistics. Those operational realities matter. The proposal hasn't adequately addressed them, and I don't think approval should happen without an independent technical review of these specific issues.

I work in the area around Wickham and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street (SSD-89869959).

My main concern is the aviation and crane risk that hasn't been properly addressed in the application. Building a tower this tall in this location isn't just a matter of whether it can physically be constructed—the applicant needs to demonstrate that it can be done safely without creating unacceptable hazards for the surrounding area, including Wickham, Newcastle West, and the Newcastle Interchange precinct.

The heritage and townscape issues add to my concerns that this application simply isn't ready for approval yet.

I'm not opposed to new housing, but we shouldn't be rushing into approvals when there are still unresolved questions around flood risk, traffic impacts, wind effects, design outcomes, public domain issues, and infrastructure capacity. These need to be sorted out properly before anything gets approved.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm a delivery driver covering the Wickham and Newcastle West area, so I'm on these streets most days. I don't think this application should be approved as it stands.

A 43-storey building is a massive jump in scale, and I haven't seen the applicant properly show that Wickham can handle something this big without serious problems. The streets around here, the Newcastle Interchange, the whole feel of the precinct — this development would change all that, and it would set the tone for everything built after it.

What concerns me most is that no one's properly looked at what happens when you pile this on top of everything else already happening in the area. And the affordable housing and public benefits being offered don't seem anywhere near enough to justify asking for a development this large.

Because of the sheer size of what's being proposed, the assessment needs to be careful and based on solid evidence. I'm not convinced that's happened yet.

Dear Assessment Officer,

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

I've been involved with the local community group here for several years, and we're genuinely worried about whether a building of this size can go ahead without causing real damage to the area. The application just hasn't shown us that it can work without creating serious problems for Wickham, Newcastle West and the Newcastle Interchange.

My main concern is the construction phase. This isn't just about whether it's technically possible to build a tower — it's about whether the applicant has actually thought through what a fair outcome looks like for the people who live and work nearby. The dust, the traffic disruption, the noise over what will likely be years of work — none of this feels properly considered in what they've submitted.

Then there's the hotel component. Adding pick-up and drop-off for hotel guests on top of everything else just makes the whole thing feel premature to me. We haven't had the chance to properly understand the everyday impacts before they're throwing this extra layer on.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street because I don't think it should be approved as it currently stands.

I've lived and worked in Wickham as an artist for several years, and I'm genuinely concerned that a project of this scale hasn't properly demonstrated it can work here without serious problems for the neighbourhood, Newcastle West, and the Newcastle Interchange precinct.

My biggest issue is the affordable housing component and what's actually being offered to the community. The public benefit claims need much clearer details — things like how long the affordable units stay affordable, how rents are set, who manages it, and whether what's being offered is actually fair given how much the developer is gaining from this uplift. Right now it feels vague, and I don't think we should accept impacts of this magnitude without concrete answers.

I'm also concerned about what happens when you layer this development on top of everything already happening in this area. Traffic, buses, pedestrians, bikes, and all the other new building going on — it's already quite a lot. This proposal needs to be judged on what it actually does to Wickham, not just because it's near a train station or because Newcastle needs more housing in general.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I'm a first home buyer looking at properties in the area, and I'm worried this application hasn't properly shown how a 43-storey development can work here without creating real problems for Wickham and the surrounding neighbourhoods.

What concerns me most is the public domain and road reserve. The proposal seems to depend on outcomes and interfaces with public land that aren't properly locked in or confirmed. These aren't small details that can be sorted out later—they're fundamental to whether this should be approved at all.

I'm also not convinced the design excellence has been properly demonstrated. The application should show clearly how this will actually be managed, with specific drawings and conditions, not just vague statements about what they intend to do.

With a development this large, the assessment needs to be careful and based on solid evidence rather than assumptions.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I've lived in this area for a long time, and I want to raise some serious concerns about this 43-storey proposal at 10 Dangar Street.

The scale of what's being proposed here troubles me. I don't see how a development this large can work without creating real problems for Wickham, Newcastle West, and the whole Interchange precinct. The application just hasn't shown that it can be done properly.

What really bothers me most is the design. The design excellence process is still up in the air—there's no complete Alternative Design Excellence Strategy, and the State Design Review Panel's issues haven't been properly answered. This isn't something that should be sorted out later on. It's fundamental to whether this should be approved at all.

Then there's construction. The applicant has given us broad statements about managing impacts, but nothing concrete. We need actual drawings, clear conditions, and real commitments about how work will happen on site. That's not too much to ask.