NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39, Sydney NSW 2001
Submitted via: NSW Planning Portal
Re: Formal Objection — SSD-89869959 — 10 Dangar Street, Wickham — Proposed 43-Storey Mixed-Use Development
Dear Assessment Officer,
I am the owner of a residential property at 15 Union Street, Wickham, and I am writing to object to SSD-89869959. I wish to be clear that my concern is not about housing supply in general—it is about whether this particular proposal has followed an appropriate planning process and whether its impacts are properly resolved.
Planning Certainty Is Undermined by This Application
I invested in Wickham on the basis of the adopted planning framework, which set height limits and floor space ratios that reflected years of strategic planning and community engagement. If a developer can obtain approval for a site-specific rezoning that doubles the incentive height and floor space, using the HDA pathway as a shortcut around a genuine strategic assessment, then no property owner or investor in Wickham can rely on the adopted planning framework as a basis for their decisions. This is a matter of fundamental planning equity and public trust in the planning system. I ask the Department to require a genuine strategic justification for the concurrent rezoning before any approval is contemplated.
Overshadowing of Neighbouring Properties
A building at RL150.9 metres will cast winter shadows that extend well beyond the immediate site boundary. Council's pre-DA advice raised specific concern about overshadowing of The Store and the Government building adjacent to the Interchange. Properties along Union Street and Hannell Street may also be affected. I ask the Department to require independently verified overshadowing diagrams for a wider area around the site, including all affected properties within a reasonable shadow radius, before any determination is made.
Hotel and Function Venue Noise
A 171-room hotel with restaurant, bar and function facilities on the ground and lower podium levels of a mixed-use building in a predominantly residential and mixed-use precinct raises legitimate concerns about operational noise from late-night functions, deliveries, loading, and patron activity. I ask for a Plan of Management for hotel, function and restaurant operations, including noise controls, hours of operation, loading windows and patron management, to be required and approved before determination.
Conclusion and Request
I ask the Department to refuse this application in its current form and to require a genuine strategic planning assessment, independent overshadowing peer review, and an operational management plan for hotel and function uses before any approval is contemplated.
Yours faithfully,

James Moses

As a resident of the Wickham area, I strongly object to the proposed 43 storey development as I believe it is significantly out of scale with the existing character of the neighbourhood and will create substantial negative impacts on the local streetscape, skyline and surrounding infrastructure.

I believe the proposed height and scale of the building is excessive and completely inconsistent with both the historical character of nearby heritage buildings and the scale of more recent developments within Wickham, which generally do not exceed 14 storeys. At more than double the height of any existing building in the area, I believe this proposal would dominate the skyline and permanently affect the visual character of the neighbourhood.

I also believe the overall design of the building is bulky, harsh and visually overpowering, particularly at street level. In my view, the proposed structure does not complement the surrounding environment and feels out of place amongst the existing architectural style and scale of nearby buildings.

While I am not at all opposed to progress and development within the area, I strongly support projects that are well considered and visually integrate with the existing character of the neighbourhood, rather than creating an eyesore or overpowering presence. I welcome development that contributes positively to the area and reflects thoughtful planning, however I believe this proposal is unnecessarily bold, drastic and excessive in both scale and appearance.

I have concerns about the capacity of the surrounding road infrastructure to cope with a development of this size. The streets within this part of Wickham are already narrow and challenging. I regularly witness and experience near misses and difficult traffic conditions particularly entering Bishopsgate Street on to Charles Street and the surrounding one way roads of Station & Union Streets. The current traffic flow from Charles Street through to Station Street, including the sweeping bend within this route, already creates challenges for larger vehicles navigating the area safely with high pedestrian activity accessing the public transport interchange.

I believe the increased number of residents, visitors, service vehicles and operational traffic associated with a development of this scale will significantly worsen congestion and create additional safety risks for road users and pedestrians. I am particularly concerned about the impact on public transport pick up and drop off areas which are already very minimal. Delivery access, waste removal services and large trucks required to service the proposed retail and hotel operations (plus residential), all within streets that are already limited in width and accessibility is most concerning

I also believe the increased population density generated by such a large development will create broader social and amenity impacts for the local community, both during the construction period and once the building is fully occupied.

Overall, I believe this proposal is excessive in its height, scale and bulk and is not appropriate for the Wickham area. In my opinion, it does not align with the established character of the neighbourhood, the surrounding built environment or the capacity of the local infrastructure to adequately support a development of this magnitude. If the development was more than halved in height and capacity, it would have my support

NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure
Major Projects Assessment
GPO Box 39, Sydney NSW 2001
Submitted via: NSW Planning Portal
Re: Formal Objection — SSD-89869959 — 10 Dangar Street, Wickham — Proposed 43-Storey Mixed-Use Development
Dear Assessment Officer,
I am an urban designer who has studied and worked in the Newcastle and Hunter urban context for many years. I reside at 2 Bourke Street, Wickham, and I write to object to SSD-89869959 on urban design and public domain grounds.
Built Form Is Incompatible with the Wickham Street Context
The proposed podium presents 0 metre setbacks to Dangar Street, Hannell Street, and Charles Street, with the tower also sitting at 0 metres to Hannell Street. Zero setback podium and tower interfaces on a corner site adjacent to the Newcastle Interchange creates an oppressive street wall condition, particularly in a precinct where pedestrian movement and public domain quality are central to the strategic vision for the Interchange gateway. From an urban design perspective, this massing strategy optimises floor area at the direct expense of street liveability. I ask the Department to require an independent urban design peer review of the podium and tower setbacks, street wall height, interface articulation and pedestrian activation before any determination.
Through-Site Link Quality Is Not Demonstrated
The through-site link and public domain works are presented as major community benefits that partially justify the scale of the uplift. However, Council's pre-DA advice raised concern about ground-floor landscaping being in constant shadow. If the through-site link and public domain areas are substantially shadowed, wind-exposed, and overlooked by a 43-storey tower on all sides, they will not function as high-quality public space. The claimed public benefit should be assessed against demonstrated usability, not paper area calculations. I ask for sun access diagrams, wind comfort data and independent urban design assessment of all proposed public domain areas before determination.
Circular Tower Form Creates Unresolved Interface Issues
The circular residential tower form creates curved balcony geometry that Council's pre-DA advice identified as functionally problematic. Curved balconies may be architecturally striking but they reduce the usable floor plate of outdoor space, complicate furniture arrangement, and create planning and structural difficulties at the perimeter. The visual impact of a circular tower above a rectangular podium at this height also creates a prominent skyline object that the visual impact assessment's "severe" and "moderate-to-severe" ratings confirm is not yet resolved. I ask the Department to require a revised design excellence assessment before any determination.
Conclusion and Request
I ask the Department to refuse the application or require an independent urban design peer review, demonstrated public domain quality including solar access and wind comfort, and a revised design excellence pathway before any determination is made.
Yours faithfully

I write to formally object to the proposed development at 10 Dangar Street Wickham.

Whilst I support sensible and well-planned development in Newcastle, I believe this proposal represents an excessive overdevelopment of the site and will create significant adverse impacts on surrounding residents, infrastructure, traffic conditions, public amenities, and the character of Wickham.
My objections are outlined below.

1. Excessive height, scale and bulk
The proposed building height and density appear inconsistent with the existing and emerging character of Wickham and surrounding residential areas. The overall scale of the development is excessive for the site and will dominate the streetscape, creating an imposing visual impact and reducing the human scale of the area.
The development risks setting an undesirable precent for future overdevelopment within Wickham.

2. Traffic congestion and parking impact.
The proposal will significantly increase vehicle movement within an already constrained traffic environment surrounding Dangar Street, Hannell Street, Station Street, and the Wickham Interchange precinct.
Existing congestion during peak periods is already problematic, and the development is likely to worsen:
• Local traffic delays
• Intersection congestion
• On-street parking shortages
• Pedestrian safety risks
Visitors parking provisions also appear inadequate and may result in overflow parking into surrounding residential streets.

3. Overshadowing loss of amenity
The height and bulk of the proposal are likely to cause unreasonable overshadowing of neighbouring properties and nearby public spaces, reducing access to sunlight and impact residential amenity.
There are also concerns regarding:
• Loss of privacy through overlooking
• Visual intrusion
• Reduced outlook for neighbouring residents
• Increased wind tunnel effects between buildings

4. Infrastructure and Service Capacity
There is insufficient evidence that existing local infrastructure can adequately support the increased population generated by development.
Concerns include pressure on:
• Local roads
• Drainage systems
• Public transport capacity
• Public open space
• Community services and facilities
The cumulative impacts of high-density development in Wickham must be properly assessed before approving additional large-scale projects.

5. Flooding and drainage concerns
Wickham has known flooding stormwater management issues. Increased site coverage and density may worsen stormwater runoff and place additional strain on existing drainage infrastructure.
A more detailed and transparent assessment of flooding risk, stormwater impacts, and climate resilience should be undertaken before any approval is considered.

6. Construction Impacts
The likely duration and scale of construction activity will create substantial disruption for nearby residents and businesses, including:
• Excessive noise
• Dust pollution
• Vibration
• Traffic disruption
• Construction vehicle impacts
• Reduced pedestrian accessibility
These impacts may continue for an extended period and significantly dimmish local amenity.

7. Neighbouring character and liveability
The proposal does not appear to appropriately respond to established character and liveability of Wickham. Large scale development must be balanced with the protection of residential amenity, public spaces, and community wellbeing.
Residents should not be expected to absorb unreasonable impacts simply to accommodate excessive density outcomes.
Conclusion
For the reasons outlined above, I respectfully request that the consent authority refuse the application or require substantial redesign and reduction in scale to properly address the significant impacts on the surrounding community.
I ask that these concerns be fully considered during assessment of the proposal.

Yours faithfully,
Robert Terrence Payne
U1202 1 Union Street,
Wickham. NSW. 2293

I feel there are to many people in this building as there is to little parking in the building. The building is to big for the environment. The shadow will be to big. The scale of the building will cause difficulties for people with disabilities especially in the event of a fire. The scale will be overwhelming for people with disability. It will be difficult for people with mobility restrictions to get from Charles st to station street through the 3m walkway between the building and the station as they have put steps there. There is not indication in the proposal to fix the broken footpaths in along Charles street and Danger Street. These streets are currently unsafe for people of low mobility.

Given the size of the development in terms of numbers housed I think it is important improvements are made for pedestrian access the Newcastle Harborside i.e. Honey Suckle over Hannell St.
Crossing Hannell St is currently poor (traffic lights over divided road) which is not user friendly for pedestrians and cyclists, and I seek consideration for the applicant to assist or to fully fund the appropriate authorities to build a pedestrian overbridge and make it a condition of approval of the development.

As a resident in this neighbourhood there is already a significant issue with parking for both local residents, visitors and members of the community attempting to access local shops and businesses. This development will create additional parking issues with insufficient availability of parking. The height of the building is not in keeping with the other surrounding buildings and does not align with other houses and buildings. The mixed accommodation is a cause for concern in terms of the potential for increased crime as a result of increased numbers of residents sharing common living spaces.

1) 14 floors have been turned into 43 floor development but with inadequate parking spaces, there are three levels of parking with not enough spaces allocated to the hotel.
2) There is no improvement to passive surveillance as the ground floor is service handling with empty foyers.
3) The design is elitist, different amenity is afforded to different tenancy conditions in the building. The co-living cannot access the BBQ areas and additional services provided in the building. This is soul destroying.
4) The building at 43 floors is unacceptable for Newcastle and Australia.

1.The Development is Far Bigger Than the Rules Allowed, the site current is industrial land where apartments are banned. The developer wants to rezone the land to allow more than sever times the current size limit, and a height where there is currently no limit.
2. wind tunnel effects, Tall towers create strong wind gusts at street level. The developer accepts there will be wind problems along our street, but only did a basic desktop review and wants to leave proper wind-tunnel testing until after approval. The winds that creats from the high building will cause a huge noise to our building plus the current noise could harm residents health.
3. Water pressure and fire safety will be affected, cos the current units numbers already cause some water pressure, the new building will make it even worse.
4. There are many apartment blocks on herbert st already and this new construction will make this area too crowded, and increase traffic jam already happen everyday,,,
Yours sincerely

Inappropriate for the site and has already been declined as such.
Inconsistent with local planning objectives.
Visual impact and overshadowing.
Traffic impacts not addressed.