See attachment

Please find my submission below and attached
I object to this proposal and ask that it be rejected on the following grounds.
The development is too bulky for it location and its design does not fit in with its surrounding character and wont be likely to in the future. Due to its overwhelming of the site filling it to capacity, compounded by it positioning on top of the hill it will dwarf all around it and over shadow and reduce privacy and amenity unreasonably around it. Further its premise for additional scope on the grounds of providing affordable housing it a falsehood. Even with reduced rent to specified levels, the " affordable apartments" will not be affordable for those for whom such housing is intended. It will also not be in perpetuity but for a limited time, unlike the bulk and visual impact of the building. This development is oversized and misrepresents its affordability in return for excessive height and developer profit. For these reasons and more this development needs to be rejected. I reserve the right to add addendum to this submision.

I object to this proposal and ask that it is rejected on the following grounds:
The misrepresentation that there is affordable housing at this premium location of this development and only existing for a 15 year period and only 2 units available. these are luxury apartments and do not address the housing crisis or affordability in the area, even at proposed reduced rent they would not be deemed affordable for the criteria of such.
Street parking frequently excess capacity during the week currently without the extra need for beach days for general public and visitors. the apartment block will never provide enough parking. Id also like to know if this apartment block restricts short term rentals that remain vacant in cooler periods and dont address the housing crisisif not fulltime living arrangements. these apartments are not addressing the housing crisis nor the affordability crisis. developers and the rich are only going to benefit here not the general community. this proposal is being promoted dishonestly and poor legislation is being leveraged to increase developers profits, by bypassing local planning laws and ignores the community amentity, infrastructure which is already at capacity and concerns for liveability in this community. shame on you. its completely floored and needs to be addressed appropriately.
I reserve the rigth to add an addendum to this submission.

This project is supposedly affordable housing. Affordable to who?I have been a resident of Church Point for 41 years.Mona Vale is where I shop, where my medical facilities are situated .I am witness to how Mona Vale is currently struggling to support it's growing
population and it's needs at this time.
MAIN CONCERNS...This development will open the doors for more huge structures ,housing more people,this will put further pressure on the amenity of the village of Mona Vale and it's surrounds.
Car parking spaces are full in Summer and generally little access to the beach.
Roads are in disrepair post flooding.
2 ROADS IN AND OUT. SAFETY ISSUES WHEN BUSHFIRES OCCUR.
Predictions from the RFSA are that future bushfires will be catastrophic and as ferociousand as difficult to control as the fires we are watching in Europe and overseas.
Aging water infrastructure...enough water to quench the flames?
Mona V ale cannot bear the strain.
I reserve the right to add an addendum or this submission.To expand on this issue
Yours Faithfully, Anne Tenney.

Objection attached

This project is horrible. The proposal is way overstated and far too high for the street and Mona Vale.
The building will be a disaster as it will place too much pressure on the services at that location.
W&S will be a disaster owing to the level of digging below Darley street and interruption on other properties.
The building will tower over adjacent properties removing morning sunlight.
Also towering over buildings, invading the privacy of owners for using their buildings as designed and approved.
The additional tenants/owners will be a significant problem for parking. The tenants will overflow to Darley Street making parking impossible for invalid owners to park outside their property.
Mobile services will be interrupted and garbage collections will be very difficult.
Traffic routing will need to be changed by causing Seabeach Ave to open to Barrenjoey Road as will Heath street to open as well.
Explain to those residents on the impact on their streets.
During the building process where will the trade vehicles park? Council to make special parking available at Mona Vale Beach.
Darley Street, East will need to be shut off at beach front. To force other Mona Vale traffic away from Darley Street to Seabeach and Heath streets.
Park Street will need to be extended to allow for better traffic flow to beach.
My property fronts Darley Street and I will not be able to park out front of my house.
This will make me feel unsafe in the area because of the additional people and traffic involved.
This cannot go ahead. It would be better to relocate the Bus depot and place it there. Much closer to services for people in the affordable apartments.
This project is divisive!

Please see submissions below