The $3.2 million development, located at 48 Old North Road, divided councillors on Tuesday night - with the vote in favour by eight to four.

The development will see the construction of two cremators, a new 300 seat chapel, 5000 plot cemetery and 10,000 niche memorial garden.

But the proposal has been divisive with many people saying it is a welcome addition to a growing city, while others are vehemently opposed.

Since it was first lodged in 2018, council has received more than 200 submissions against the application with a range of concerns flagged, including health, traffic safety and social impacts.

Long time Farley resident Colleen Canny spoke in public access at the meeting, saying she represented the community concerned for the development.

"My focus is the general health, safety and wellbeing of our Farley community. With me, I have a 1530 signed petition of concerned residents who share my concerns for the establishment of the crematorium," she said.

Ms Canny raised questions on the safety of the emissions, and also spoke of fears for traffic implications.

However, a report prepared by council staff investigated the objections including the prominent concerns for emissions and traffic.

As part of the application, an air quality impact assessment (AQIA) was conducted which found the "highest percentage of any pollutant predicated was for dioxins and furans with up to 21 per cent of the relevant criterion predicated, followed by Mercury with concentrations up to 7.5 per cent of the relevant criterion".

The assessment was included in a report prepared by council officers which found the emissions would be "negligible".

"Emissions were the predominant concern raised by the submissions, and it is acknowledged that this development will generate emissions, they are however well below the relevant criterion and therefore not sufficient to warrant refusal of the application," the report read.

Labor councillor Ben Whiting said the emissions are "well below" the requirements.

"I think there's little doubt in our growing city that this will offer an essential service in the broader public interest," he said.

"It is a service we need in our local government area. The people of Maitland need a place like this where they are able to farewell their loved ones with dignity."

Labor councillor Robert Aitchison, who also supported the development, said he sympathised with the neighbours but the development was necessary to meet Maitland's growing population.

"I'm no expert on emissions but all I can do is be guided by what has been put in front of me," he said.

"The emissions meet all the necessary regulations put forward by NSW. The traffic does meet the local development control. I feel for the neighbours in the area, however as Councillor Whiting mentioned it is a city and we do need to move forward.

"We have to go forward for the good of Maitland."

However Labor councillor Henry Meskauskas and Independent councillor Mike Yarrington objected to the development application.

The pair commented respectively on the emissions being unacceptable for the surrounding community with Cr Meskaukas saying it was "unfair".

Liberal councillor Ben Mitchell said he was voting against the application because of his concerns over the traffic implications as well as public interest.

"I also have to acknowledge the bulk of our public submissions of the people I represent," he said.

The four councillors who opposed the development application were Liberal councillors Ben Mitchell and Mitchell Griffin, Independent councillor Mike Yarrington and Labor councillor Henry Meskauskas.

Liberal councillor Sally Halliday was not present at the meeting.

Do you know you can subscribe to get full access to all Maitland Mercury stories? Subscribing supports us in our local news coverage. To subscribe, click here.