This project is unacceptable for this area.

For several reasons I believe the project should not proceed. (1) Despite not currently being zoned in a bushfire area I know from having lived in Katoomba for many years that when there is a bushfire in the Narrow Neck and Cahills lookout areas parts of Narrow Neck Rd (including142-150) is badly affected by smoke and embers and traffic in and out. (2) This project seeks to go against current restrictions such as height of buildings and floor space ratios. There are already many closely packed buildings in the nearby vicinity such as the Escarpments and the size of the current proposal would create over-use and too many people and vehicles in a small area. (3) The number of studios and 1 bedroom apartments would not assist a community feel but more of a ghetto. (4) Overall the project is too intense for the site and area. The reasons given in the EIS seem to be that there would not be enough profit if there were shorter and/or fewer buildings or apartments. Profiteering should not be at the expense of the community.

This proposal is entirely unsuitable for the proposed site. The height if the buildings at 5 stories is higher than any other buildings in the blue mountains. The developer is requesting rezoning to make this possible. This sets a dangerous precedent for the blue mountains. This proposal and the way it is being put through undermines the way local government has managed to maintain and value the blue mountains as a special part of NSW. The environmental environment impacts are high. The area has swamps that feed catchments and additional water run off from hard surfaces will negatively impact the surrounding areas. The area is bush fire prone which would endanger a lot of people and make it very difficult to evacuate in an emergency. The current road infrastructure will not support evacuating people from the 208 dwellings listed for the development. This development threatens the very nature of the blue mountains. I have lived in the blue mountains for 40 years and what makes it special is the lack of large development s that have a Los Vegas feel about them. I sincerely hope common sense will prevails and this development application will be refused in its current form.

Firstly I am highly concerned that I live in close proximity to this development, and have received zero communication from the developer regarding the application. I believe this to be a legal requirement in State Significant Applications. It has come to my attention that none of my neighbours received any information either.
The scale of this development deeply concerns me, as the roads and infrastructure are highly inadequate in this area of Katoomba, to cope with such increases in traffic. There are no footpaths for pedestrians, or wide enough lanes for bike traffic, and limited public transport options.
In the fifteen years that I have lived in Katoomba, this area has been evacuated/directly effected by fires, many times. Again, the road ways are unsafe to be used in such times, by so many. The RFS rely heavily on the dam water in the adjacent Planetary Health Precinct.
As a daily user of the Planetary Health Precinct, I am already appalled at the destruction of habitat and vegetation by the developer, to keep this aged DA alive. Many trees were destroyed which were outside the protection zone - taping that only went up retrospectively.
I am a member of the local Bird Observers, who hold outings here. At the last meeting, we saw endangers species such as Gang Gang and Glossy cockatoos. It is an incredibly important area of habitat for many, many species. Following what I have already witnessed, I have very little confidence that this development will take any environmental concerns into consideration, particularly in regards to being at the top of the Katoomba Creek catchment.
From an aesthetic point of view, there is no compatibility or sympathy for the local built environment. It is of a height and scale unlike any other in the mountains, and is completely counter to the feel of the mountains villages.
I am dismayed by the complete arrogance shown by their lack of obligatory community consultation on this project. For this reason alone, followed by road infrastructure issues, this development must be denied.

I am writing to oppose the submission for development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba, on the basis that construction at this scale poses a threat to the unique ecosystem of the area. I am a bush regenerator with a particular interest in eucalypts, and have spent significant time studying mallee ashes in the blue mountains. On narrow neck road I have observed a population of green leaved mallee ashes (eucalyptus series strictae), a eucalypt group of significance warranting further study as noted by eucalypt botanists Paul Gadsby and Dean Nicolle.
Katoomba’s mallee ash population is unique because this part of the blue mountains is one of very few areas in which their habitat is minimally disturbed by human impact. This gives them both a unique value for the ecosystem and also reflects an opportunity for academia. I believe this area would benefit from further study, and the potential for research would be lost if the area were developed on the proposed scale.

Remnant bushland is a finite resource. Once plants are cleared, the soil disturbed, or hydrology altered by increased urban runoff, this cannot be “undone”, even by future regeneration efforts. We lose what was there; both the knowledge and the landscape itself. The blue mountains are not pristine by accident; decades of deliberate choices have been made to conserve and protect this land. I urge you to make such choices again now.

Endangered species habitat we must preserve these sanctuaries for wildlife

The proposed development is a source of deep distress to the Blue Mountains community. The scale and height of the proposal impedes the natural view of the escarpment and obstructs the landscape outside of current planning regulations. Not only does the proposed development have poor access to the town centre and the train station (being outside of the 800m walking distance scope of an accessible area as stipulated in the Housing SEPP definition), but is a protected area. The state significant development is highly inappropriate in the cultural and visual wealth of the Blue Mountains context. The height and density of the building disrupts the established treeline and this urban development is starkly incongruous with the visual beauty and prominent view of Narrow Neck Road. Further, the development, while classified as residential, prima facie appears to be a resort style complex with restaurants, orientated towards tourism and failing to address the current housing crisis afflicting the community. The development epitomises short term strategic thinking and is a planning anomaly. The proposed area is also located on an area classified as highly bushfire prone with limited escape routes possible. Historically, this area suffered from the Ruined Castle and Cahill Lookout fires in which the surrounding areas were evacuated. Given the rising heat of Blue Mountains summers, it is highly likely that a bushfire could occur in this area in the next 10 years.

The state significant development is a harmful and inconsistent proposal which fails through numerous streams. Not only does it oppose notions of sustainability and liveability, it actively disturbs the defining values of the Blue Mountains community and is holistically inconsistent with the location and planning context. The development abandons pillars of sustainable urban development, community consultation and under current regulations, should not be permitted in the Blue Mountains. It fails to be an opportunity for growth for the Blue Mountains and instead, the multifaceted deficiencies present a risk for the community and the spatial and sustainable context of the location.

I have just recently moved into the Blue Mountains, and I live just streets away from 142-150 Narrow Neck Road. I oppose the proposed development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road due to my concerns surrounding the impact on our local environment and the safety of the local community.

I work in bush regeneration and recognize that the scale of this high-density development plan housing hundreds of people will degrade and destroy the surrounding ecosystem including sensitive native bushland. Not only is this bushland valuable for protecting our local biodiversity and providing habitat for wildlife, but it is a major tourist draw with thousands travelling to the area each year to view and explore the gorgeous native bushland. This major development would create a massive influx of people permanently in the area, on top of an already high volume of visitors and tourists, leading to a significant increase in the disturbance and degradation of the surrounding native bushland and ecosystem.

I am also concerned about the scale of this development proposal in the context of our local infrastructure. The development proposal for 142-150 Narrow Neck Road includes 266 apartments, all of which are likely to have a number of people in each apartment which would be a massive increase in residents, cars and foot traffic in the area. There are no footpaths, there is very little public transport to the area and the roads in and out of the surrounding area are limited and narrow. This sudden increase in residents with the current infrastructure will pose a higher safety risk to the residents in the event of bushfires and evacuations. I would not want anyone in the community to be endangered in the event of an emergency because of overdevelopment and limited escape routes.

I am quite disappointed that the proposal has been put forward through the Housing Delivery Authority despite the Blue Mountains council's rejection of the plans. I oppose the use of the Housing Delivery Authority in this case, and I would like future development in the Blue Mountains to be planned collaboratively with the local council to ensure those who know the area best can ensure the safety of its residents and ecosystem.

1. I support objections raised by Blue Mountains Conservation Society and others.
2. I appreciate the need for housing, particularly affordable housing, I have not been able to find their definition of 'affordable'.
3. The current building project on the site that they show pictures of and refer to in their EIS, is already an eyesore. This, at double the height, would be horrendous.
4. When fully occupied, that's a lot of extra people and vehicles on a narrow road and in a bushfire situation, this will be dangerous.
5. I note that some of the Agencies haven't responded to email correspondence (mostly initiated in Dec or Jan). This is a very short time frame for some of these Agencies to consider all the documentation and respond.
6. The 'consultation' with locals has been appalling. The claim is that they have a website and a FB page. The website invites comments but gives very little information. The FB offering as listed in the EIS is set up as a Personal Profile, not a Public facing page, and the personal profile has 2 friends and no information. The website is one you would never find unless you knew exactly what you were looking for. Again I only found it due to the link in the EIS. I am a member of many local FB community groups and so many are saying that they've known nothing about this until the last couple of weeks. Why didn't the proponent engage with the community using these groups if they genuinely wanted community engagement?
7. Re-zoning is a huge decision. Of course there are times when re-zoning is appropriate. I am not convinced that this project has been able to justify such re-zoning.
8. The size of this project has caused it to be State Significant, and yet it will be the local Council who has to deal with all the fall out. Therefore Council's concerns must be addressed.
9. They discuss access to solar (for some and not all). Why can't the solar be made available to all? What about community batteries?
10. Overall, my greatest objection to this development is the height of the buildings.
With thanks and kind regards,

The building is ugly.
There will likely be a lack of parking.
The development will bring more traffic to the area, which the streets are not ready for. There are no footpaths from the development to town. A development of this size should include funding for upgrades to multiple streets, including addition of footpaths, to Katoomba CBD and other points of interest.
The size of the building and the amount of residences is very out of character with the area.
Development in this area to allow more homes should be encouraged, but should be done with consideration to fit in of the surrounding area, and should include funding and construction of amenities, including footpaths and street upgrades.
Also, again, the building is ugly. It will be regretted in years to come if constructed.

This project needs to go back to the drawing board and be planned by a team who are smart, know what they are doing, and have empathy for the surrounding town.

Please don't build this ugly building.

Thanks
Michael