Revised Submission: SSD-82276964 – 47 Darby Street & Tyrrell Street
​To the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure,
​I am writing to formally object to the proposed State Significant Development (SSD-82276964) at 47 Darby Street and Tyrrell Street, The Hill. My objection centers on the inappropriate massing of the proposal, which fails to respect the established architectural language and topographical flow of Newcastle’s civic and heritage core.
​1. Failure of Massing and the "Canyon Effect"
The combined impact of the Darby Street and Tyrrell Street developments creates a continuous "wall" of apartments. This design choice ignores the natural "slope" of the suburb, effectively boxing in the Civic Park precinct and severing its visual and physical connection to "The Hill".
​Contrast with Existing Precedents: The proponent's justification of height based on nearby structures is fundamentally flawed. Existing tall buildings in this precinct—such as the University (NUspace), the Town Hall with its clock tower and various churches—utilize a stepped massing approach. They feature large, activated bases with a gradual reduction in footprint as height increases. This creates depth, allows for light penetration, and maintains a sense of "breathability" in the skyline.
​Inappropriate Footprint: Unlike these established precedents, the 47 Darby Street proposal maintains a bulky, consistent footprint across its height, creating a monolithic barrier rather than a tiered addition to the city.
​2. Erosion of Cultural Reverence and Civic Grandeur
In Newcastle’s CBD, height has historically been reserved for buildings of significant cultural and civic reverence.
​Architectural Hierarchy: Structures like the City Hall Clock Tower and the nearby ecclesiastical buildings utilize height to signal their importance to the community. Their architecture reflects a level of grandeur and craftsmanship appropriate for their status.
​Diminishing the Art Gallery: By contrast, the proposed residential towers offer no such civic contribution. In fact, they threaten to diminish the $40+ million public investment in the Newcastle Art Gallery expansion (due to open February 2026). The gallery’s prominence will be overshadowed by a private residential development across the street that lacks the architectural merit to justify such a dominant position on the skyline.
​3. Critical Infrastructure and Flood Risk
I remain deeply concerned regarding the relocation of easements and the management of stormwater.
​Existing Failures: The intersection of Darby and Tyrrell Streets is already a flood risk. The manhole on Darby in front of Tyrrell Street is a known failure point, frequently overflowing during standard heavy rain events.
​Cumulative Impact: The proposed changes to drainage, combined with the massive increase in non-porous surfaces, pose a direct threat to the surrounding low-rise properties. This development risks "locking in" a permanent flooding issue for the sake of a high-density footprint.
​4. Opaque Planning and Community Exclusion
The complexity of the provided shadow diagrams makes it nearly impossible for local residents to calculate the true loss of solar access. Furthermore, utilizing the SSD pathway to bypass the City of Newcastle’s carefully planned height corridors ignores years of ratepayer-funded urban design work. This development seeks to profit from the "cultural precinct" atmosphere while simultaneously destroying the very elements (views, light, and connectivity) that make the precinct valuable.
​Conclusion
The 47 Darby Street proposal is an exercise in over-development that lacks the stepped massing and architectural grandeur required for this sensitive location. It creates a physical wall where there should be a topographical transition. I urge the Department to reject this proposal and demand a design that respects the cultural hierarchy of Newcastle’s skyline.

The project changes the street scape and character of Cooks Hill in a negative way and thereby the heart of Newcastle. It’s an overwhelming building far beyond accepted dimensions of developments in that area.

Hello, I object to this proposal. I think Newcastle City Council and the Newcastle public should be involved in a big planning decision. The proposal will dominate the arts precinct . I think there are many places that can be developed that won't impact a community place . A four story development would not impose. Thank you for listening.

I wish to make a submission objecting to the proposed redevelopment of 47 Darby St for the following reasons:
I. I believe that it is a gross, opportunistic overdevelopment of the site - three times Newcastle Council’s height restrictions for the locale.
2. Unacceptable visual impact and overshadowing.
Its insensitive overbearing presence would overwhelm the surrounding public and heritage buildings as well as the amenity of the public green space that is Civic Park.
3. The height, scale and bulk of the proposed building is inappropriate. It will be at odds with the area’s village-like community, its dining venues and the relaxed vibe that the Darby St precinct is renowned for.
4. The “Darby” building residents will be entering and exiting onto Darby Street contributing to the existing traffic congestion in the street.
The commercial spaces on the lower floor would also contribute to the already problematic traffic and parking and impact on the safety of the area.
5. This proposal completely disregards and disrespects the considered, long term planning of Newcastle Council which has plans and rules in place to protect our community from overreach such as this.
6. The height of this building needs to be limited to 14m - the height that complies with Newcastle Council’s DCP.
7. The need for more residential apartment housing can be more appropriately addressed in the many areas in inner city Newcastle where high rise development is already permitted - Honeysuckle, Hunter Street, Wickham and the western end of Hunter Street.
In conclusion, I request that the State Government Consent Authority reject this proposal.

I do not support this location for a building for that size. It would be detrimental to the city in that location. please consider it somewhere else

My objection is to the size , being 3 times the legal limit of the area. Competing with the current proportions of the stately buildings of the civic precinct.
Constraint should be shown to respect the cultural and heritage institutions that line the streets surrounding Civic Park.where heritage has been given priority. Both The Hill and Cooks Hill suburbs fall in the heritage conservation area, meeting at the Civic Area of the city. Maintaining the graciousness of the past and respecting it by maintaining integrity in recent buildings like the modest size of the newly built Art Gallery.
Large residential mixed with business belong in areas like Honeysuckle and Newcastle West along the public transport route of the tram.
The civic area is a place of gathering. With people moving between the restraunt area of Darby St and the Night life of the city. It is often very noisy as crowds of people move about enjoying the evening/ night The city. We have seen how the residential high rise in the city bought an end to some of the night clubs and bars due to noise complaints of the BBC residents. I would hate that to happen in this area.
I do not see this proposed development as completing the missing link between Darby and Hunter Streets , as put by the developer. They are linked perfectly by this beautiful Civic Space.
The last thing I would like to mention is the effect the increase in traffic. Tyrrell Street is a bottle neck already throughout the day. Construction of this magnitude, during both the building phase and the consequence of it being filled with residents would magnify this problem and cause chaos for all those living , going to the schools in the area, those who work in the area, and the police who frequently use it going to emergencies.
Thanks

The proposed development is out of character for the environment. The height is extreme and will negatively impact the local aesthetic. If this proposed development goes ahead it will forever change the nature of developments in Newcastle. All developments should be considered and approved by locals and not be approved by people from major cities. Newcastle does need to increase housing supply but not at the expense of dramatically changing the landscape. A 45 metre high building is excessive and will cast shadows, increase traffic which the town can not sufficiently sustain. These types of proposals should not be approved so fast and should be given time for the local newcastle residents to consider and provide feedback. I fundamentally disagree with this development. Change is always needed but not to the detriment of our city. Development should be considered but this development is excessive and will line the pockets of the developers and is not in the interest of anyone but themselves. Newcastle needs to be protected from becoming a concrete jungle. We need progressive and thoughtful development for a sustainable future.

The height of the building and its profile in a cultural area as proposed is ridiculous. If you can't build a 3 storey building and make a profit, you can't be much of a developer.
Take a walk around the area and see the precinct as is. The proposed building is unnecessary and would seriously harm the character of the area.
Not that any of the people associated with this development are going to live anywhere near it.

This would significantly change the streetscape und the character of the Cooks Hill neighbourhood

I write to formally object to the proposed 12-storey apartment complex within Newcastle’s Civic Precinct.

The current legal height limit for this site is 14 metres. The proposal seeks to more than triple this limit to 45 metres through a “spot rezone.” Such an extreme departure from established planning controls is inappropriate for this location and sets a damaging precedent in a community that is proud of its village feel. The scale and bulk of a 45-metre tower is entirely inconsistent with the surrounding built form.

The proposed front tower would visually dominate the two-storey art gallery, Civic Park, surrounding gardens, key landmarks, historic and cultural buildings, war memorials, and nearby places of worship. This area forms the heart of Newcastle’s civic identity. A 12-storey structure would overshadow and overwhelm the established character and diminish the human scale of these important public spaces.

The proposal conflicts with Newcastle’s long-standing planning strategy to concentrate high-rise development within designated corridors and precincts, rather than dispersing it into sensitive civic and heritage areas. Approving a spot rezone of this magnitude undermines strategic planning certainty and weakens community confidence in the planning framework.

For these reasons, I strongly oppose the proposed development and respectfully request that it be refused. The scale, strategic inconsistency, and heritage loss, collectively demonstrate that this proposal is not in the public interest.