The Hunter and Central Coast Joint Regional Planning Panel is currently making its decision on the proposal for three residential buildings with 161 units and 11 two-storey dwellings at 11-17 Mosbri Crescent, lodged in 2019.

The three larger buildings are a nine-storey east wing and six-storey west wing building containing 68 units, a seven-storey building comprising 59 units and a rooftop communal open space and a five-storey building with 34 units.

Dozens of people spoke at two planning panel meetings yesterday afternoon, taking issue with what they deemed as "over-development" of the site with the proposal exceeding the allowed height limit, privacy concerns for Newcastle East Public School, heritage and traffic impacts, among other factors.

IN THE NEWS:

Some residents said they wanted to see the site developed, but not in the proposed form.

Economics Professor Bill Mitchell, who resides in the area, said there was a "high degree of social cohesion" in the community currently that would be put at risk if the development went ahead.

"When we see that sort of scale of urban development elsewhere in the world, what we've found is that the urban amenity of the existing residences is severely compromised," he said. "The social cohesion starts to break down."

Chris White, who has two children at Newcastle East Public School said the apartment balconies and windows would "directly overlook" the school playground, which made his children "fearful".

"One said 'I don't like the feeling of someone looking down at me', the other said 'no, just no'. This is unacceptable," he said.

Engineer and nearby resident Jillian Kilby said she was "pro-development", but "not supportive of increasing residential development and density in a dead end cul-de-sac away from public transport and services such as grocery stores".

She said a Stanford University study found there were "decreasing outcomes" for people who lived further away from grocery stores and public transport in low cost housing such as apartments, "which is exactly what you're creating".

Glenn Burgess from Cooks Hill Residents Group mentioned concerns raised by City of Newcastle's heritage officer and Heritage NSW about the proposal intruding on views from The Obelisk and nearby heritage conservation areas in The Hill and Cooks Hill.

Many residents mentioned the plans do not comply with the site-specific development control plan.

Stephen O'Connor spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said the DCP was "very conceptual" and created before they did further investigation during the development application stage.

"Yes, we've had to seek non compliances with the DCP," he said. "But we believe we've put forward really strong justifications for those and brought about many benefits by not complying with the DCP."

In relation to height limits, Mr O'Connor said there were eight overruns, but they were "very isolated exceedances" that didn't impact on neighbours or the adjoining reserve.

He said they had provided a greater number of car parks than required, and the traffic modelling had been reviewed by council officers, who had found there was no requirement to upgrade roads or intersections.

Mr O'Connor said views to the west from The Obelisk included the CBD, which is "constantly changing".

"The proposed development, if it's approved and constructed, will be hardly recognisable in that vista," he said.

"There are a lot of other buildings which exist and which are under construction and which are likely to be approved in future that will be far more dominant."

Newcastle council has endorsed the plans, subject to a lengthy list of conditions.

The panel will announce its decision in the next week.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: