After reading the information provided on the NSW Planning website relating to a “State Significant Development. Exhibition Residential flat buildings at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba” I wish to register my objections to this project.

It appears the Developer seemed assured of their position in advance given that they have cleared the site of bush and vegetation mid 2025 before this proposal was even brought to public attention. Coincidence?
It has been said the Developer advised the Planning Dept. that a “letterbox drop” was circulated to residents within a 1klm of the site. I am within 1 klm and neither I or my neighbours received any such information from the Developer in reference to this project.
In a document by the NSW Gov. …..State significant infrastructure guidelines – preparing a scoping report … states the Developer has an obligation to have Community Engagement under 3.5 Community engagement = Page 10. I have checked under the EIS (56) and no section refers to Community Engagement in any of the documents. If the Developer states, there has been engagement then it should provided within the EIS (56) information. If this documentation is available, then I request a copy by return ..thanks.
My objections to this proposal are as follows

a] The location in the World Heritage Area. It can be said that people who live in such a location can be too precious about their area but feel they want and need to protect it for future generations and I for one feel that responsibility. The proposed unit blocks will be the first high rise buildings in the Blue Mountains area. This may be used to leverage other such developments in the future. Others have identified the impact on the surrounding environs as to damage that can occur away from the site caused by the development of the site.

b] The Proposed Unit Blocks. In the proposed unit blocks plans it appears an attempt has been made to squeeze as many onto this small parcel of land. This leads to very narrow road access into and out of the area. Access by fire brigades, ambulances and other emergency services can be obstructed by vehicles parked in the road during an emergency. The proposal identifies parking as follows Quote ……”7 residential flat buildings 24-32 apartments each (with basement parking for 289 spaces (256 spaces for Buildings A-G and 33 spaces for Building H)) A restaurant (18 car spaces on ground level)” …… end quote Which reads as each building has 289 spaces for parking, obviously incorrect which begs the question what parking is proposed. Again, this is basement parking but I doubt day to day residents would be likely to park in the basements and not on the road.

c] Traffic Flow. The proposed access and egress to the site is onto Narrow Neck Rd. This road is single lane in each direction leading to the GWH. From the GWH the road is part of the Blue Mountains Scenic Drive which is used by many people visiting the scenery of the Blue Mountains. These visitors can be from overseas countries used to driving on the opposite side of the road to Australia and this has led to previous accidents. The road is in poor condition with no kerb or guttering in places. The edges are crumbling with large potholes too. It is obvious this road is unlikely to survive the heavy construction vehicles that will use it if this proposal goes ahead. The road is under the BMCC and if damage occurred then the repair cost would be borne by local ratepayers. This would seem unreasonable that a Developer can make their money and not pay for repairs. The proposed units would bring at least 300 vehicles onto to this road, even more given that some people would have two vehicles.

d] Bushfire Risk. As in the past, the Blue Mountains is in a permanent danger area for bushfires. We have been evacuated twice over the years as bushfires were threatening our home. Also people who live opposite side of Narrow Neck Road to the proposed unit blocks. If an evacuation was necessary, the only escape route would be onto the GWH and with the added vehicles traffic chaos would ensue.

e] Enviros / Wildlife. Prior to the proposal this location was covered with trees and bush undergrowth as has been identified in the EIS [56]. The site was cleared in 2025, before the development proposal, the habitat of much of the wildlife would have been destroyed. There were small animals and birds which could be seen on a walk through the area. If this proposal is granted the construction of these units will create more disturbance in the area and a likelihood of further contamination to the water in the creek below the location. With the buildings and surrounds it will create hard surfaces where water from the site will flow downhill into the waterways eventually flowing downstream to the Katoommba Falls recreation area.

f]. Finally. This unit development has a lot of negatives given the location it is proposed to occupy. It would be more appropriate to other locations within the Blue Mountains where existing infrastructure can accommodate such a proposal. The BMCC could provide details of such a location, but it appears they have been frozen out but are doing their best being proactive in representing their ratepayers. Our local member has raised the issue too within the NSW Planning and was awaiting a reply.

I would like to finish with this quote from Hon Paul Keating.
Financial Review Oct 31 2006. At a conference hosted by the Local Government Association of NSW, Mr Keating said centralised planning powers had elevated the status of developers like Meriton's Harry Triguboff, leading to developments that were not in the community's best interests. End quote This quote represents the feelings of many in the community when it comes to the possible developments of these unit blocks at this location.

see attached

This project is ugly, unnecessary and totally contrary to the character of the Narrow Neck Peninsula, and to Katoomba in general. Uglier even that the Unit blocks near Leura station, and in an even more inappropriate position.

I strongly object to this proposed project.

This project is in a Heritage area, with limited access and egress, currently exacerbated by the closure of Victoria Pass, and is in an exceedingly bushfire-prone location in the path of the westerly winds that so frequently endanger the area. I doubt that insurance companies will provide bushfire coverage for any owners.

There is no evidence that this project will provide housing for locals. The area has been, and continues to be swamped by non-resident investors or weekenders.

The buildings do not comply with council planning or heritage values, and pose serious danger to any prospective residents, and further unnecessary pressure on firefighters.

We voted for Labor in the belief that they would not engage in the Liberal party’s corrupt collusion with property development interests, but this current government is blatantly betraying its voter base.

As a close neighbour to this project, I'm very concerned about the environmental impacts and local infrastructure impacts such a massive development would have. For example the strain on our small local roads, hospital and Katoomba parking areas just to name a few. Even more important though is the devastating damage that would be inflicted upon our national park flaura, fauna and water ways. Please don't allow this to go ahead.

This development would change the Blue Mountains as we know it.

The proposal is to rezone land to allow:

9 x four-storey residential buildings containing 214 residential apartments
52 serviced apartments
three restaurants and an internet cafe
a wellness and arts hub incorporating a wellness centre
conference facilities and an art gallery
considerable on-site parking.

Unfortunately this was approved as a State Significant Development.

I do not support this development for the following reasons

it overrides critical LEP protections that have been developed over 30 years to safeguard the Mountains’ environment and heritage.

Bushfire risk - High-density, multi-storey housing in an already high-risk bushfire zone increases evacuation challenges and puts lives at risk.

Environmental damage - increasing stormwater runoff and disrupting ecosystems, Undermining the ecological values that underpin our World Heritage listing
.
Loss of character - Dense, multi-storey blocks would irreversibly change the leafy character streetscapes and heritage character that make the Blue Mountains unique.

Light pollution

Noise pollution

Street Parking

Economic consequences - Tourism relies on our natural environment and village character. If these are eroded, so too is the foundation of our local economy.
This is not just about one development. If thi development is allowed to proceed in the Blue Mountains, it opens the door for similar high-density projects across our towns - potentially changing the region forever.

This is a world heritage area and as such is not suitable for such a development.

This proposed development is completely unsuitable, for the following reasons:
- it is a bushfire-prone area with a narrow road out. It would not cope with large numbers of residents having to leave in an emergency
- there is a Local Government plan devised over many years to protect the unique and fragile environment of the World Heritage Area from unsuitable and damaging development eg increased run-off from hard surfaces entering natural bushland, and this development ignores the scientific and other reasons this plan has been successfully used
- the Blue Mountains is a highly -visited tourist destination, providing income for many people. The scale of this development
is out of proportion to existing housing and does not belong in the leafy surrounds and low height environment of a tourist destination focused on nature
- I am not against increasing housing stock, but this development is basically in the wrong place, much too big and completely unsuited to a small town situated in a World Heritage Area.

The Blue Mountains is a number of small communities built along a ridgeline on Darug and Gundungurra land. The ecological significance of the area has been acknowledged by the World Heritage classification. In the summer of 2019/2020 the whole area and the residents were under threat from the biggest bushfires to ever burn in this area. The access roads being a single highway were dangerously insufficient for evacuation. There are areas of bushland that have not regenerated in the six years since these fires. The Narrow Neck development proposal would place the highest density housing in the Blue Mountains region on one narrow road , endangering those people in the inevitable event of fire. The development also pays no heed to the natural world heritage environment that it would be built within. There are no sustainable building practices or eco products being used but standard, quick, polluting materials that give no long term benefit to the house owners or the environment. There is nothing in the development that is sympathetic to the beautiful area that it would be part of which means that it would only create a stain on the landscape rather than any benefit. I'm so saddened that while the world suffers under the reality of climate change and pollution we have learnt nothing and change nothing. We need better housing not quick, ugly, more polluting housing on ecological sensitive land. I am appalled by this development submission for it's scale and insensitivity to the natural beauty that it would desecrate.

I strongly oppose this development. I live in the local area.

The proposal is completely inappropriate for the surrounding area. It is a high density development which is a long way from the town centre and train station. There are very limited services for the people that will live there. There are no high rise buildings anywhere near this project meaning it will be an eye sore. The roads around the project are poor with most without guttering or street lights. There are no footpaths. A large increase in population in the local area will put immense strain on this limited infrastructure leading to further deterioration and hazards for pedestrians.

This type of development would be far better suited in the town centre near services shoes and transport.

Submission on Residential flat buildings at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba


I oppose this development application because the significance of the World Heritage Area of the Greater Blue Mountains is much greater than this “State Significant Project”. It is our responsibility to look after the natural environment here on behalf of the whole world. The state government is included in “our”.

• Inappropriate planning pathway - The HDA process overrides critical LEP protections that have been developed over 30 years to safeguard the Mountains’ environment and heritage. We took the time to look at all the issues.
• Bushfire risk - High-density, multi-storey housing in an already high-risk bushfire zone increases evacuation challenges and puts lives at risk. You would have to live near an approaching bushfire to personally know the fear this engenders. But you can look at all the evidence of bushfire risk, climate change and the increasing risks to know that it is negligence to place people in a position where they can’t escape.
• Environmental damage - Paving over pervious surfaces, increasing stormwater runoff and disrupts ecosystems, undermining the ecological values that underpin our World Heritage listing. There are countries in the world where every development has to take this into account. Here is a state significant issue ready to be acted on.
• Loss of character - Dense, multi-storey blocks would irreversibly change the leafy character streetscapes and heritage character that make the Blue Mountains unique.
I also think that adding in extras like restaurants and shops and serviced apartments aren’t about housing.
• Economic consequences - Tourism relies on our natural environment and village character. If these are eroded, so too is the foundation of our local economy.
Please consider these issues seriously and look for other options to help people gain the housing they need.

Yours sincerely

Karen Taylor