Dear Assessment Officer,

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

As an emergency services volunteer, I've seen firsthand what happens when buildings aren't designed with safety in mind. My concern with this application is specifically around basement safety. A development of this scale needs to prove it won't create risks that emergency responders have to manage, but the application hasn't adequately addressed this.

It's not enough to say a tower can physically be built. What matters is whether the applicant has actually demonstrated a safe outcome — one that's fair and proportionate to what the area can handle. Basement design affects evacuation routes, flooding risk, and how we'd respond if something went wrong. These details matter, and they're not convincingly dealt with here.

The wind impacts add another layer to my concerns. Together, they suggest this application isn't ready for approval yet.

Dear Assessment Officer,

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

As a member of the strata committee here in the area, I've been thinking about what this scale of building would mean for our neighbourhood. My main concern is around basement safety. The proposal needs to demonstrate that the basement design actually works safely at this scale — it's not enough to just say the building can be constructed.

The basement sits below existing structures and infrastructure in a densely developed area. I haven't seen proper independent assessment of how the excavation and basement construction will affect neighbouring properties, water management, or structural integrity of surrounding buildings. That matters for safety.

On top of that, the wind impacts the developers mention add another layer of concern. These issues should be properly resolved before anyone decides whether to approve this.

work without causing serious problems for Wickham and the surrounding precincts. The location is particularly tricky — it's in a flood-affected area with already stretched infrastructure, which means we need to be really careful about safety, basement design, emergency access, and evacuation arrangements.

Dear Assessment Officer,

I work as a building manager in Wickham, and I'm writing to object to the proposed 43-storey development at 10 Dangar Street in its current form.

My main concern is flood risk. I manage buildings in this area and I know how water behaves here when it rains heavily. The application hasn't demonstrated convincingly that a development this size won't make flooding worse for the surrounding precincts. I need to see proper modelling that accounts for how stormwater will be managed at this scale, and what happens to neighbouring properties when the system is under stress.

Beyond the flooding issue, I'm also worried about what this sets in motion. A building of this height and footprint is a significant shift from what Wickham currently looks like, and it will shape how the western edge of the city centre develops. That's a big decision to make without being absolutely certain the infrastructure can handle it.

The applicant needs to provide clearer evidence on flood risk and binding commitments that actually protect the area. Right now, the application asks the community to accept a major departure from the planning framework without that level of certainty. That's not good enough.

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.

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.

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.

'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.

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.

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.