I have close family in Castlecrag and they’ve said the centre has been declining for a while. I fully support this development.

Dear Sir
I am writing to oppose the proposed development at 100 Edinburgh Road, Castlecrag.
Having invested time and effort in accepting the original proposed development and had the delay associated with achieving a balance between the developers ambition and community facility, the latest proposal has vastly tipped the balance in the favour of the developers own financial targets at great cost to the facility of the local community.
The prospect of 11 storey building structures are so obviously out of place in an area of low rise buildings that if approved this development will be scorned as completely inappropriate for years to come and will set a dangerous precedent which others will attempt to follow and of course would be higher on the downhill elevation.
I could understand a development of this scale on major logistics hubs such as rail or light rail or major roadways but this has none of those features. The nearest rail is miles away and Eastern Valley Way is a road which already becomes congested in rush hours and would be unacceptably blocked by the additional traffic generated by this proposal.
When I look at other developments such as those on Pacific Highway, which is a major thoroughfare and has the benefit of close proximity to a major rail line, it has been possible for developers to combine supermarket facilities with apartment facilities in structures that do not exceed 5 storeys and still make a profit which is surely what we should be striving for in such a delicate area as the Walter Burley Griffen designed suburb of Castlecrag.
The peninsula is extensive and has but one road to exit for traffic, it is a bushfire prone area and if we were to require a rapid evacuation of the suburb at peak hours the scale of this development would endanger lives as the traffic flow would be problematic.
I repeat my vehement objection to this proposal and ask that council and state authorities act sensibly to constrain the developers wishes to those encapsulated in the proposal that has been approved at much lower levels.
yours sincerely
Katja and Rob Gordon

I think future generations will appreciate this kind of project, and I support its approval as a great investment in the long-term future of Castlecrag.

I cannot believe that this outrageous proposal has got this far!
Castlecrag is a truly rare, unique and historical suburb of Sydney. The surrounding areas are dotted with apartments no higher than four stories. To have this preposterous and ugly building at the gateway of Castlecrag is not only outrageous but a hideous blight on the area.
I have lived in the area for 47 years and accepted the need to develop a higher level of housing density. This has been done very well up until now. A good example of this was the redevelopment of the market garden in Northbridge on Eastern Valley Way.
Please do not allow this development to go ahead before amending the maximum level to match others in the area.
Jane Boyd.

I support the proposed 100 Edinburgh development in Castlecrag as I believe it will contribute positively to the local community and surrounding area. Developments like this helps improve housing availability, modernise spaces, and enhance the overall streetscape.
The proposal also has the potential to bring economic benefits to the area through increased local activity and investment, while supporting the ongoing growth of the community. As long as the development continues to address considerations such as traffic management, environmental impact, landscaping, and neighbourhood character, I believe it would be a valuable addition to the area.
Overall, I am supportive of the project and encourage the approval of the development application.

I believe there is to be a separate entrance for low socio economic persons and I think this is discriminating. Also there is no mention in the outline that there is an opening community space for gatherings of the residence of Castlecrag and surrounding suburbs as there was in the previous building that was on that site.
Despite what state laws say I think the appropriate height in that position would be about six stories as a maximum. The character of the area is determined by the fact that many of the homes have been designed by Water Burley Griffin and his wife and I think this proposal is totally out of character and unnecessary in its size and scope.

It does not meet the community standards. The complex is too large. It needs to be reduced in height.

After review of this submission, I find the Developers Consultants key findings relating to its appropriate scale, building type and suitability for the rare and unique suburbs heritage, to be absolutely lacking in objective substance or fact. This planned development, would demonstrably impact the not only those that live directly under its shadow and outsized physical presence, but a much largely circumference of the community. A 10+ story building is nowhere to be seen in any direction until you reach downtown Chatswood. The arguments and specific reference locations relating to visual impact have been cycnically chosen and manipulated to include 'maximum' folliage and vantage point benefits to the weight of the developer. The arguments that surroudning density will grow to match this 10+ development is faled and predicated upon an assumption that surrounding density would materially shift in a swift enough period of time to 'soften' this grotesquely oversized proposal. I support growing density, beyond even the initially propsaded 3+ stroy street level initial proposal. Perhaps even up to 5 Stories. Approving this development at this 10+ story proposed scale would be a great travesty for the local community and character and benefit only the Developer who is looking to destroy a community for no reason other than profit all aided by an SSD 'blank cheque'process that does not adequately balance the needs of communities and density challenges. I wholeheartedly request the NSW government to reject this proposal and request a more modest and appropriate development to be planned in its place.

Given the local natural character of the suburb as well as the Burley Griffin legacy this 11 to 13 storey development is way out of scale especially as it sits atop a high point and dominates the surroundings.
All developments ( most very recent or under construction ) along eastern valley way do not exceed 3/4 storeys so why should this be any different
After many years of community engagement the currently approved 3 ( at front ) /5 ( at rear ) storey development was accepted as a reasonable compromise by virtually all ; tearing this all up makes a mockery of community engagement
The lack of public transport also does not support this as any sort of transport hub
Finally the lead salesman advised upon my enquiry that the units would start at 5 million so almost irrelevant as far as alleviating the housing shortage.
The 10 affordable units ( which will apparently be rented at 20% less than market ) appears tokenistic

This is a modern, environmentally conscious design. The project will improve overall quality of life.