I think this will be a great addition to the racecourse and will be a much healthier, hygienic stable area than the current old and dilapidated stabling area on the other side of the racecourse. It will increase employment in the area both during construction and on completion when more trainers will be able to use the racecourse and facilities. It will also be a safer environment for both horses and employees and the plans have been well thought out and considered. I think it will be a great asset to Newcastle in general and Broadmeadow in particular.

Re: NJC new stables.
Newcastle Jockey Club have for over 100 years occupied the site at Darling/Chatham streets and have always been a responsible venue manager.
This new stable complex will be a boost for the racing industry and create more employment for participants.
The current stable facilities on site are in a poor condition and below industry standard. This new structure will ensure racings future in the area and keep the Newcastle Jockey Club at the forefront of the industry.
Additionally many jobs will be created during the construction.
The NSW racing industry is one off the biggest employers in the state and this new facility is necessary to keep our employment high.
I fully support this project.
Regards,
Geoffrey Barnett………

An amazing development 'long-overdue' for the Newcastle Jockey Club. Not only will it create initial jobs during the construction phase but an ongoing legacy to the people of Newcastle and the Hunter Valley. The proposed 'State of the Art' facilities will be of significant benefit to all of the associated 'shareholders' who utilise the facilities offered by the NJC - not the least being the trainers; breeders; jockeys & general supporters of Racing in NSW. The 'old' and 'outdated' buildings; stables & infrastructure need to be demolished and the beneficiaries of the new facilities should be afforded the opportunity to move into a safe and modern new facility. Wonderful project !!

Good morning,

Please see attached Nathan Doyle of Doyle Racing’s letter of support towards the plans for upgrading the facilities at Newcastle Jockey Club.

Kind regards
Kara Cummins

Doyle Racing
Administration

The proposed Newcastle Jockey Club (NJC) stables complex seeks to improve the capacity and quality of existing stabling and training facilities at Newcastle Jockey Club. The thoroughbred racing industry provides significant direct economic and social benefits to the city of Newcastle and to the wider Australian economy through its intrinsic linkages to the thoroughbred horse industry as a whole.
The racing industry in Australia incorporates a diverse range of businesses including horse breeding/farming, horse racing (thoroughbred and harness), and management of the facilities used specifically for those activities. In 2017–18, the racing industry contributed approximately $1.4 billion to the Australian Gross Domestic Product. This is in addition to income generated for the economy by breeding, horse sales, prize money and wagering. Figures from Racing Australia suggest there are approximately 159,000 individuals involved in thoroughbred racing nationally, including over 82,600 racehorse owners, as well as various other participants, volunteers and employees.
The proposal will provide world class amenities for horses and employees and thereby improve animal welfare and occupational health and safety of staff. The proposal has the potential to improve environmental conditions through increased water and energy efficiencies and better waste management. The increased stabling capacity has direct amenity benefit to local residents through the removal of early morning horse transport, reducing noise impacts.
This project will further promote Newcastle as a location for significant racing events raising the potential for employment opportunities and related flow on effects associated with the overall strengthening of the thoroughbred racing industry in the Hunter region. Such events will support further jobs creation in the hospitality and tourism sectors of the local economy.
The proposed development will have a net positive benefit to the natural, social and economic and built environment and is worthy of favourable consideration.

I (on behalf of my family), object to the proposed development and the nature on genuine consultation that has happened with residents who will be immediately effected by the plans set out in the provided documents. My main points of concern are as follows;
• In the reports, the comment that ‘Noise generated by the proposed site will be audible at times but not intrusive at any nearby residence’ – How can you guarantee this with such dramatic increase in horse population, increased traffic and staff/workers?
• The statement that ‘As the character and amplitude of activities associated with the site will be similar to those already impacting the area, it will be less intrusive than an unfamiliar introduced source and should be acceptable to residents.’ – The phrase ‘less intrusive’ simply highlights the fact it will be intrusive. Of course something unfamiliar and introduced would be intrusive but it doesn’t hide the fact that this development will be highly intrusive, much more so than the nature of what is already there.
• Why can’t we as residents have an acoustic fence surrounding the entire perimeter, not just a small section? With noise being a major concern for neighbouring residents, this seems like a reasonable measure to meet half way. The proposed style of fencing appears to to have minimal to no acoustic benefits at all.
• Construction should not occur outside standard hours, why have the term standard if they aren’t going to be complied to? I worry that if the boundary for ‘standard hours’ and what’s considered ‘reasonable’ is pushed an inch, it will be taken for a mile. Who will suffer? Us, the residents near by with young families and working from home jobs.
• The statement that ‘With these or equivalent measures in place, noise from the site will be either within the criterion or generally below the existing noise levels in the area for the majority of the time.’ – By definition, this statement directly implies that at some stages, noise will reach above the existing noise levels which are already noticeably loud and intrusive. How is this fair and reasonable for residents? How will residents be remedied for such noise interference?
• As a current resident, the biggest auditory impact isn’t small vehicles, it’s large vehicles. As stated in the traffic report, the number of large vehicles in daily attendance will increase significantly. This poses serious noise concerns for my young family.
• Would NJC provide a subsidy/allowance to provide noise/light minimising improvements to the front of houses? This is especially important to houses like mine directly in the path of the Darling Street exit point where large trucks will be exiting and turning directly in front of my house.
• How will 520 horses in stables at night, 2 stories tall not represent a significant noise risk to near by neighbours? How will this risk be eliminated in the middle of the night when the stables are loud and residents are woken during all hours?
• I’m concerned by the proximity of where waste will be collected to my residence. This represents a significant health and safety concern from air born contaminants.
• Significant concerns at the exit point on Darling St. This presents a massive blind spot. As a resident up this end of the street, sometimes the only safety aspect when leaving driveways is the open paddock giving clear sight of turning traffic on Chatham Street. Typically cars and cyclist come quickly this corner and provide a very real safety concern of collision. Large trucks moving slowly in this area seems like very poor judgement from those involved in positioning exit point at this place.
• How will raceday parking and traffic be accounted for with a dramatic reduction in punters carparks?

Finally I'd like to know if any thought has been given on how NJC may be able to compensate residents directly effected to allow them to make adjustments to their property to deal with the key issues of noise and light pollution that may directly effect their property as a result of the proposed expansion to the NJC?

Kerryn and Randall Woo
135 Darling Street
Broadmeadow, NSW 2292

Application Name: Newcastle Jockey Club – New Stables Complex
Application Number: SSD-12982045

As the owners of 135 Darling Street, Broadmeadow we object to this proposal for the following reasons:

Size of Proposed Development
The proposal includes stables for 520 horses – which represents a 67% increase to the current on-site stabling capability. The justification provided for this increase in capacity was that it was “selected based on future demand and to maximise efficiency in the use of land and resources”. We feel that this is not an adequate justification, particularly when the NJC in their Management Plan state that due to a lack of resources (rider availability), there is a maximum of 375 horses expected to use the facility on any one day.

In addition, if increased capacity were to be required in the future, the location of the current stables would be available for refurbishment and/or re-development.

Having a lesser capacity provides benefits for air quality, traffic, parking and noise, some of which are detailed further below.

Air Quality
The proposal inadequately mitigates the risk of odour and dust from the stables. In addition, the EIS misrepresents the situation when it states: “the separation distance between residences and the source of any generated and stored waste will be far greater under the proposed development than it is currently”. This reflects where the stables are currently located. The proposed location for the new stables has never had stables, so to state that it will be an improvement is inaccurate for all residents living on Chatham and Darling Street.

As stated above, we believe the control measures proposed for odour and dust mitigation are inadequate. The focus of the EIS and Air Quality Report (AQR) is on the storage of waste in “sealed bins”. The process of getting the waste from the stable to the bins whilst minimising odour and dust is largely overlooked (apart from frequency of clean out).

An additional concern is that the stables are designed such that they have open louvers on the northern and southern elevations. According to the AQR, the predominant winds are in the north-westerly direction. The result of these two factors is it will be a regular occurrence for wind to be blowing through the stables and in the direction of residences on Darling Street.

Proposed alternative:
- Re-orientate the stables such that the natural ventilation is directed away from nearby residences during prevailing winds
- Install mechanical air extraction and filter units to stable buildings
- A decreased development size would create space for further setbacks from nearby receivers
- New stables could have been built at the existing stable location. A new track access point could have been built, thereby still negating the need to float horses from the stables to the track and reducing the number of residences impacted by this development.


Parking
The parking assessment for peak days (race days) is inaccurate and does not address the impacts of the proposed development on local parking. It is inaccurate in that it has utilised capacity from the Future Stage 1 and 2 Carparks (Table 1 - Traffic and Parking Assessment) to show that an acceptable level of on-site parking will be maintained. Given there is no current Development Application for these carparks and their construction requires the demolition of residential housing and a childcare centre, it is not valid to include these parking spots in the assessment. Because of this, we do not feel a competent assessment of parking availability has been completed.

We do note the proposal to use temporary markings on the grassed area to increase parking efficiency on race days, however we feel this does not equate to compensation for the parking area that will be lost due to the proposed stable development.

In addition to this, there has been no consideration to the availability of parking during what will be an extensive period of construction.

Proposed alternatives:
- During construction provide off-site parking with buses to transport patrons to and from the venue
- Reduce the development size (i.e. number of stables), this would increase the area available for parking
- Include the development of the Stage 1 carpark in this proposal, so that the additional 303 carparks are available at the time of construction completion


Pests
The EIS, including the Pest Management Plan does not address the risk of flies and mosquitos AT ALL. This needs to be addressed for the benefit of all NJC’s neighbours as well as for the welfare of the horses.

Water Management
The three basins that are located adjacent to Darling Street at the southern side of the development appear to be designed to prevent surges into the council stormwater system. We are concerned that these basins will attract and be prime breeding ground for mosquitos and flies if not maintained properly.

Proposed alternative:
- Construct underground retention systems.



Whilst we appreciate the need for the NJC to expand and provide a more practical stabling solution for the horses and their associated activities, we feel that the development proposed has not adequately contemplated the impacts on nearby residents. The benefits of this location for the NJC are clear – no downtime as the current stabling arrangement can be used whilst this proposed development is under construction, it is adjacent to the existing track access point and there is ample space for their wants and needs. However, at no point during our review were we confident that potential concerns of residents were appropriately valued in any risk/benefit analysis of choosing the proposed option. We are particularly disappointed in the mitigation measures placed on the issues that would be of largest concern to us and our neighbours – that being air quality, pests and parking.

We urge you to firstly, reconsider the size and location of this development and secondly, apply much stronger mitigation measures to the air quality, pests and parking risks associated with this proposal.


Regards,
Kerryn & Randall Woo

Ifully support the project