Dear Mr Crakanthorp,

As one of your constituents, I urge you to actively oppose the ‘State Significant Development’ proposal for 47 Darby St, Cooks Hill. The proposal, coming under the Housing Delivery Authority, seeks to fast track a decision affecting people in Newcastle, which will be made by unelected bureaucrats based in Sydney.

The process sets a dangerous precedent, undermining local planning authority and disregarding the LEP of Newcastle’s elected Council. The developer’s proposed amendments, as outlined in the Concurrent Rezoning Report Mixed use Development document are, I believe, truly outrageous and greedy: an increase in allowed height from 14 metres to 45 metres and an increase in FSR from maximum of 2.5:1 to 3.48:1. If these changes are granted, the resulting buildings will be completely out of scale with those in the nearby, cherished cultural precinct, having a negative impact on that precinct and the amenity of the many Novocastrians who use it.

The proposed buildings will tower over and dominate the historic synagogue in Tyrrell Street, the Regional Art Gallery, the Regional Library and the historic Baptist Tabernacle in Laman street. Similarly, they will dominate Civic Park and the war memorial. In addition, construction will require the demolition of the 1930s electrical machine shop in Tyrrell St, which is recognised as an historic building by Newcastle Council.

The developer attempts to justify the amendments sought to the Newcastle LEP through what appear to be cynical references to contributing to the provision of needed housing. There is only passing reference to contribution to the provision of affordable housing in the Newcastle LGA. The luxury apartments in this complex are not the type of housing needed by our community, and certainly not at the expense of Newcastle’s control over its future development.

I note the fact that an artist’s impression of the design was not available prior to the public consultation period. This would appear to be in contradiction of the standard of consultation required by a State Significant Development. The artist’s impression now available clearly indicates the proposed gross overdevelopment of the site.

Allowing this development to proceed under the guise of a response to the need for housing in Newcastle creates a dangerous precedent for our local area and others in New South Wales.

For the reasons outlined above I urge you to actively oppose the ‘State Significant Development’ proposal for 47 Darby St, Cooks Hill.

Subject: Formal Objection to the Proposed 12-Storey Development at 47 Darby St, Cooks Hill
I am writing to formally object to the proposed 12-storey mixed-use development at 47 Darby Street, Cooks Hill. This proposal represents a gross overdevelopment that ignores local planning controls and will cause irreparable harm to the character of the area.
My objection is based on the following planning grounds:
1. Massive Breach of Local Planning Controls
The proposed building height of 35 metres (12 storeys) is a 300% increase over the 14-metre height limit mandated by the Newcastle Local Environmental Plan (LEP). This height is illegal under current local controls and undermines the integrity of the planning system.
2. Severe Overshadowing of Residential Properties
The excessive height will result in substantial overshadowing of neighbouring residential buildings, including the Regency Park complex. This development will block vital sunlight to living areas and fails to meet the minimum 3-hour mid-winter sun requirement outlined in the Newcastle Development Control Plan, which will severely impact my amenity.
3. Incompatibility with the Cultural Precinct and Heritage Character
The site sits directly opposite the low-rise Newcastle Art Gallery. A 12-storey tower will visually overwhelm this cultural hub and the Cooks Hill Heritage Conservation Area. It is entirely out of scale with the "village feel" that defines Darby Street.
Conclusion
I request that this application be refused. Any development at this location must respect the 14-metre height limit to protect the sunlight and character of our community.
Disclosure of Political Donations:
In accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, I declare that I have not made any reportable political donations or gifts to any local councillor or employee of the City of Newcastle in the past two years.

RE State significant development proposal at 47 Darby St, Newcastle
As our member for State Government I am requesting that you oppose the above development because:
the proposed building height is too high (3 times the limit permitted by Newcastle City);
allowing this building to proceed will totally dominate Newcastle's Civic Park precinct, which features our cultural institutions;
Newcastle's new Art Gallery, the Library and cultural centre,, the churches, the City Hall, the University buildings and Civic theatre.
This shared space is highly valued and is regarded as the cultural heart of Newcastle, a really special place.
There are already many planned precincts in Newcastle that are allowing high rise buildings, so this proposal should not be approved in this location.
I trust that you can influence this upcoming decision,

I am writing to lodge a formal objection to the proposed high‑density residential development seeking consent for a building height of 45 metres—significantly exceeding the statutory 14‑metre height limit—and an increased Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3.48:1, well above the permissible 2.5:1.
The proposal presents an excessive breach of building height limitations given the proximity to the park and art gallery precincts, and is a development which will dominate the landscape and will create bulk and overshadowing.
Furthermore, reduction of the building separation requirement increases building bulk to a level inconsistent with the surrounding areas.
The bulk and design of the building are not consistent with the character of the area.
The proposal’s FSR of 3.48:1, compared with the maximum permitted 2.5:1, represents a substantial intensification of built form. This level of density exceeds what the local infrastructure, transport capacity, and public domain were designed to support. The proposed density places increased pressure on transport in the absence of an adequate and functioning public transport system and parking and traffic increases are not manageable with existing intersections to Laman and Tyrell streets.
Lastly, large scale social housing clusters result in too many low income earners without adequate services and infrastructure. This results in crime, social isolation and reduced community cohesion. There are other examples of similar high density affordable housing within the city where the negative effects are clearly demonstrated.
Whilst I am supportive of densification of the city and creation of affordable housing, it should be undertaken consistent with the strategic planning controls and general masterplan for the city and supported by adequate infrastructure and integration planning.
I respectfully request that the proposal be refused or require significant amendments that bring it into reasonable alignment with the established planning controls and protect the amenity and character of the area whilst also creating a socially integrated and acceptable outcome. Approving a proposal of this nature significantly undermines Newcastle Council's planning controls.

I wish to lodge an objection to the proposed development.

I am not opposed to development in principle. I support well-consed, high-quality development in appropriate locations. However, I believe this proposal is not suitable in its current form for this site and neighbourhood.

The existing neighbourhood character and overall look and feel of the area are critical to making it a place where people feel connected, comfortable, and proud to live. This proposal does not adequately respond to or respect that character.

Heritage considerations should also be given greater weight. The surrounding built form reflects a particular period and identity, and new development should be designed to complement and enhance this context rather than ignore it.

Design quality is especially important, as buildings of this scale will remain part of the streetscape for many decades. In my view, the proposed building is overly simplistic in form and presentation. It appears as a basic box with attached balconies, lacking architectural interest, articulation, or sensitivity to its surroundings. This results in a design that is visually bland and out of keeping with the established character of the area.

I respectfully request that this proposal be reconsidered and redesigned to better reflect:

the neighbourhood character
the heritage context of the area
and the need for thoughtful, high-quality architectural design
Development should enhance the area, not diminish its visual and cultural value.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Please ensure development of apartments stays at current or below existing height limits. Apartments in Newcastle are currently very expensive. Land banking is also going on. Not enough social housing is being developed. Yes supply is an issue, as is capital gains tax and negative gearing. I am your supporter. Please don’t use height to placate developers and developer profits. Housing I believe is a human right NOT an investment. Younger constituent and older women are being locked out from affordable housing and rentals. Not all baby boomers are greedy and are disappointed height of apartments is being used to develop housing that is unaffordable anyhow. I am very disappointed with NSW Government. Keep looking after the community as you have done traditionally. Thank you

I say NO to the proposed 12 Storey development at 47 Darby Street, Newcastle. The watered down heritage laws will destroy decades of careful planning, with local planning controls ignored and Heritage disrespected.
We can do better than this development.
We need your support more than ever.

Newcastle is a Regional City, known and needed for its light and space. This is why we live here. We do not want this regional city to become just another heaving metropolis.

Some reasons for the application not to be supported include:
- Excessive breach of local planning controls in terms of height, bulk, position not on high density city corridor. Has the site been thoroughly assessed for mine subsidence, flooding, water storage, protection of surrounding residential and commercial buildings?
- Disregard for protection of Newcastle's Heritage Civic Precinct from overbuilding around perimeter. Most great cities and towns around the world observe the preservation of green and open spaces supporting their Civic buildings. Newcastle Art Gallery has only just reached completion and at a modest 2 storeys will be swamped by the towers directly across Darby Street.
- Lack of sympathy for the village style of Cooks Hill on the rim of this regional city where medium to high density is out of place and out of character.
- Traffic reports suggest this development will not greatly increase traffic however the narrow streets and lanes around the site are already struggling with current levels of traffic and there is a significant project already underway nearby which will add to the load, not only for vehicular traffic but also parking issues and the safety of pedestrians in this high foot traffic zone. The effects of this development cannot be considered in isolation.
- I am a resident of the adjoining low level Regency Park residential complex. I have attended the two Residents Committee information presentations by Vivacity and am greatly concerned for the potential loss of daylight, sunlight, privacy, safety, additional pollution, possible damage to our buildings and amenities during and post construction. A significant section of our boundary borders the rear tower building and Regency Park.

In summary, the Mixed-Use DA for 47 Darby Street as a questionable State Significant Development (SSD) should not be supported in its current format.

Fiona Tarento
10/1 Queen Street Cooks Hill

I do not believe rezoning this area to be 3 times the current height requirement will be beneficial to the area. A building over 45m high will over shadow the park, art gallery and library. It will be an eye sore in a beauitful area.
A luxury apartment is not affordable housing and will have a negative impact on this area.

I am writing to object to the proposed development at 47 Darby Street Cooks Hill. It is excessively bulky and high, and will overwhelm the key civic assets sounding the location. I also think a building of this size will create traffic and safety concerns. I have written to Ms Dolwer in the NSW planning department to formally object. Thank you for receiving this feedback.