Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
COOKS HILL
,
New South Wales
Message
I am writing as a Newcastle resident to strongly oppose the proposed 12-storey luxury apartment building at 47 Darby Street.
My main concern is that this building is completely out of place in the Civic Precinct. The current height limit is 14 metres — this proposal at 45 metres would tower over everything around it. Most alarmingly, it would completely dominate the recently completed Newcastle Art Gallery. The gallery is a civic landmark, designed to be accessible and human in scale, and it sits beautifully within Civic Park and alongside heritage buildings. A 12-storey tower right next door would overwhelm it, turning a cultural treasure into a backdrop for private apartments.
The buildings also appear bulky, with minimal setbacks. At street level, they would feel overbearing and out of character for this civic space. Newcastle’s planning strategy has always concentrated high-rise in designated corridors. This site was never intended for a tower of this scale.
The proposal provides very little public benefit compared with its impact. It would increase traffic on already busy streets, affect pedestrian safety near schools and parks, and permanently alter one of the city’s most important public spaces. The short public exhibition and limited consultation make it feel as though community voices are being ignored.
This tower is simply the wrong building in the wrong place. It would overshadow the Art Gallery, dominate Civic Park, and set a precedent for further inappropriate high-rise developments in areas that should remain civic and public in scale. I urge that this proposal be refused.
My main concern is that this building is completely out of place in the Civic Precinct. The current height limit is 14 metres — this proposal at 45 metres would tower over everything around it. Most alarmingly, it would completely dominate the recently completed Newcastle Art Gallery. The gallery is a civic landmark, designed to be accessible and human in scale, and it sits beautifully within Civic Park and alongside heritage buildings. A 12-storey tower right next door would overwhelm it, turning a cultural treasure into a backdrop for private apartments.
The buildings also appear bulky, with minimal setbacks. At street level, they would feel overbearing and out of character for this civic space. Newcastle’s planning strategy has always concentrated high-rise in designated corridors. This site was never intended for a tower of this scale.
The proposal provides very little public benefit compared with its impact. It would increase traffic on already busy streets, affect pedestrian safety near schools and parks, and permanently alter one of the city’s most important public spaces. The short public exhibition and limited consultation make it feel as though community voices are being ignored.
This tower is simply the wrong building in the wrong place. It would overshadow the Art Gallery, dominate Civic Park, and set a precedent for further inappropriate high-rise developments in areas that should remain civic and public in scale. I urge that this proposal be refused.
Darryll Quigley
Object
Darryll Quigley
Object
DUBBO
,
New South Wales
Message
The proposed development and concurrent rezoning application, fail to justify the requested increase in height and FSR for the subject site.
Attachments
Stevie Bee
Comment
Stevie Bee
Comment
ADAMSTOWN HEIGHTS
,
New South Wales
Message
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
Name Withheld
Object
COOKS HILL
,
New South Wales
Message
The projected building height is far above the legal height for Cooks Hill. If approved, this building would take away the charm of historical Cooks Hill and allow precedence for other buildings exceeding the limit to be built. Please don't build this.
Rachael Petherbridge
Support
Rachael Petherbridge
Support
TORONTO
,
New South Wales
Message
Please see attached letter of support for the mixed used development - SSD-82276964.
Attachments
Helen Ford
Object
Helen Ford
Object
THE HILL
,
New South Wales
Message
The planning rules are being ignored - see attached Submission