I support the concept of Shore restoring the historic Graythwaite house and and grounds, with the addition of two purpose-build buildings that provide economic viability,support the school's purpose and blend in well into the site.

Shore will provide an economic use for the building which will ensure its future preservation as an historic building, as it uses and preserves other historic buildings in its grounds.

I am supportive of this application.

Dear Minister

Re: MP 10_0150 & MP 10_0149 - Graythwaite Concept Plan

I am writing to strongly OBJECT to this Revised EA and Concept Plan.

The SHORE school has yet to address in any significant way, the communities concerns regarding the project. Specifically:
Western Boundary buildings still remain too large in bulk, the height limit is still well beyond the 8.5 m limit, site poles are still to be erected (so that the community can see the building scale).
Traffic and parking - the school has only reduced the original student number by 10% to 450. Although an extensive traffic report has been put forward it does not address the increased traffic flow to Union street and does not mention at all the impact on local parking the senior school boys have.

I strongly urge the council to reject the proposal in its current form and insist on the SHORE amending both the western building and traffic/ parking situation.

My objections remain fundamentally the same to this plan as the previous one. Too many trees lost. Buildings too large and intrusive. Too much additional traffic. Too much additional noise load to residents.

Any additional traffic at the entry/exit of Union Street will endanger the pupils and the public.
The plans a totally inadequate and serve only the goals of Shore, regardless of the community and the safety of all.

I object to this strongly.

I live with my family in North Sydney. My objection and concerns concern traffic flow around the expanded Shore School.

Union St flows reasonably well in the peak periods but any additional traffic flows in this area would create delays on the only exit road we can use from our home.

I object to any additional traffic flows on these narrow streets.

Thank you.

a win win for all: aged care, preservation of heritage building and education!

Suggested traffic arrangements just cannot accommodated in this area. There is no room on our roads!

Consideration to position and height of proposed building should be given far more thought.

Too large a part of this proposal does not conform to community needs and requirements.

I strongly object to the revised plans. It is astonishing to me that so many of the issues raised by the neighbours and local community have not been addressed eg the traffic. The proposed entrances and exits for cars from and into Union St will cause untold congestion. Because of the already congested Blues Point Rd entering and exiting traffic will be forced to use Carr and Bay Sts causing extra and dangerous build up in the area.

Also, the proposal does not comply to the 8.5m height limit for the site. How is it that this can be ignored?

Therefore I request that the department rejects this application until these and other issues are resolved.

Regards,

I object to the Shore Development for numerous reasons, the most important being:

1. This revised application will result in extreme traffic congestion.
2. It has not resolved many of the issues raised by the local community.
3. The proposal does not comply to the 8.5m height limit for the site.

I request that the department rejects this application until these and other issues are resolved.