I’m very concerned about the size and placement of this development because.

_ The roads in and out are winding and narrow and don’t feel safe for that amount of traffic, let alone the Cyclists or pedestrians that will have to contend with the traffic.

- It’s very bushfire prone. I live close by but further from the escarpment and my home has a FLAME ZONE bal rating.
- In the event of evacuation, how do all these people leave safely.

- as someone who spends a lot of time bushwalking, a building of that size will interrupt the skyline and the natural beauty of the area. Surely this will affect tourism as well as residence.

- I believe the stormwater is going into Katoomba Creek and hence into Katoomba falls. This doesn’t seem thought out and I’m concerned about the environmental impacts.

This entire Development has the feel of a rushed job. An example of this is, as I am a nearby resident I believe I was supposed to have receive notification of this development from the developer via a letterbox drop.
I never received anything.. whether this is deliberate or just negligent neither option gives me faith that this development will be done with the care something of this size requires in a UNESCO World Heritage Site.

It is not in keeping with our National Parks.
The proposed area is a bush fire prone area.
The roads are narrow and will not sustain the additional traffic.
It’s the Blue Mountains National park.
Narrow neck rd and surrounds are part of the scenic drive, it would be a shame to build around that area.
There already has been some development (old Katoomba golf course) let’s not flood it and take it too far.

I object to the above proposal for the following reasons:
- The HDA process overrides LEP protections that have been created over many years which look to safeguard the mountains heritage and natural environment. This is a gross overdevelopment for a site which should be used for a more modest proposal that aligns with LEP.
- The Blue Mountains is already a significant bushfire risk zone and this high-density multi-storey proposal creates extra risk and hazards at times of significant crisis. The site adjoins bush fire prone land and the proposal should be supported by a bush fire assessment reviewed by NSW Rural Fires Service. No such assessment has been included in the EIS proposal.
- The height of the buildings, 5-storey (incl carpark, not the 4-storey as touted by the proposal) is substantially higher than surrounding conforming dwellings and do not fit the current LEP standard.
- It's plain ugly. The design and build of what are essentially concrete blocks would destroy the current pleasing aesthetic that makes the Blue Mountains what it is, an environmental tourist destination that relies on its heritage character.
- If this development is allowed to go ahead it opens the door for similar inappropriate, high density projects across the region.
- Inadequate storm water drainage planning. The increase in hard surface puts extra pressure on an already stretched stormwater drainage system. I do not believe that the EIS proposals for management are sufficient, especially in light of looming climate change issues. This will adversely impact Sydney's precious drinking water catchment, to where this site will drain.
- The site will require pump out for sewerage management, consequences of failure would lead to discharge of raw sewage into drinking water catchment.
- Significant native tree removal causing significant environmental damage and reducing habitat for our precious native wildlife, promoting avenues for entry by feral animals such as cats, pigeons, indian mynahs, even wild dogs.
- Serviced apartments will draw people away from those areas, such as Katoomba town centre, that are already experiencing significant business decline. Witness the vacant shops in Katoomba main street.

It's way too big. There is a chance here to develop a more appropriate, lower, well landscaped, less impactful precinct that also includes some affordable housing, which has long been touted by NSW Governments.
The Blue Mountains is a place of outstanding natural beauty. Our National Park is World Heritage-listed, our townships have a unique character, and our communities have worked tirelessly for decades to protect the environment, through careful local planning. Allowing this development in its current proposed state will make a mockery of sensible, considered town planning.

Robert Porritt

This type of development is not suitable for the Blue Mountains. The Blue Mountains is a unique ecosystem. We have a responsibility to look after it. Once it is gone, we can't get it back. It brings a lot of international dollars to Australia through tourism. The housing rule change should apply to urban areas not ecosystem like the Blue Mountains. I believe it will diminish the character of Katoomba, including views towards the escarpment, increase pressure on local infrastructure, particularly roads, worsen traffic congestion, including evacuation routes during emergencies, increase bushfire risk, particularly during evacuation and degrade the natural environment, including sensitive and protected ecosystems. I am also concerned about it setting a dangerous planning precedent for the entire Blue Mountains. I believe the Blue Mountains LGA should be explicitly excluded from the HDA and SSD pathways.

How is rezoning changing the fire danger? You are unfairly changing the rules to fit your agenda.

I object to this project because it is located in a bushfire prone area; it is too large and bulky; the residents would have serious difficulty in evacuating the site in times of bushfires; it will have adverse environmental impacts. I oppose the use of the Housing Delivery Authority pathway in the Blue Mountains. I request that the Blue Mountains LGA be exempt from the HDA pathway. The site is zoned R3 with a max height of 8m. The proposed building is four storeys, far too huge. Hundreds of additional cars would use the narrow roads. Infrastructure is a near capacity and cannot support the population increases. Katoomba has a distinct character and this proposal is incompatible with landscape and cultural identity. Thank you for giving consideration to my submission.

If you have any friends who are construction managers, ask them privately and they will tell you the quality of medium-sized buildings being made now across the board is terrible. They can tell you anything publicly, but this building will be lucky to have a 100 year lifespan before it needs demolishing. That's if it doesn't develop cracks and become unusable before then. Katoomba doesn't need a huge shonky thing plomped in the middle of the suburbs, where everyone will have to drive to the train station and clog up Narrowneck road. I'm not against Katoomba having more people, but build it OUT OF BRICK, and put it walking distance from the station. Let's make something we're proud of, not a piece of engineered obsolescence in the wrong place. The character of Katoomba is a vibrant semi-urban centre, with quiet suburbs. Let's put more good quality stuff near the middle of town, not make weird ghettos in the corners. Obviously housing affordability is an issue, but I think any quick fixes should be made with policy (investment rules / AirBnb / negative gearing / pull some other sensible zoning levers), not by quickly building white elephants in the wrong place.

To Whom It May Concern,

I attach an objection by Wilderness Australia to SSD-86456706 for your consideration and review.

Sincerely

Keith Muir