The location is not suitable for the proposed development for numerous reasons.
The location does not have a regular public transport that would allow residents to access town centre and Katoomba Station.
The location is on a western facing ridge that would be very high risk in the event of a bush fire.
Access road is narrow and would not be suitable for the additional traffic volume.

We need homes. Homes for people to live in not made-for-Airbnb foreign investor bait. Resubmit a proposal for 15.6m high housing commission flats and I’ll back you all the way in. There’s federal cash for it, cut sick.

The requirements for said funding would also fix all the other problems with it. It’d actually have to follow design guidelines and remedy the awful ventilation and bad natural light (completely gives away that this is designed for Airbnb as people who actually want to live in an apartment care about those things where weekend visitors do not). It’d have to follow bushfire and wastewater design rules too.

This whole project is just shortcuts and weasel tactics to sneak a shonky cash grab past blue mountains residents. Not notifying the council as a key stakeholder areas surrounding the proposed development is a low dog act.

Let me be perfectly clear. I would love there to be apartments built here. Apartments I can afford. Apartments physios at the hospital can afford. Apartments the fireys can afford. This project is not that. The fact the proposal includes below the *minimum* 15% required amount of “””affordable””” dwellings for the height bonus is just further evidence that affordability isn’t a true consideration made.

We deserve better than having the state government roll out a red carpet and bend all the rules to put this project up that doesn’t benefit local taxpayers. We don’t want to have to put up with what will end up as an empty during the week wannabe hotel towering over us while we have to punch on with a nurse at a rental inspection trying to secure one of the few places to live up here.

I object to this project because:
1. Environmental Damage - Paving over pervious surfaces, increasing stormwater runoff and disrupts ecosystems, undermining the ecological values that underpin our World Heritage listing.
2. High Fire Risk - High-density, multi-storey housing in an already high-risk bushfire zone increases evacuation challenges and puts lives at risk.
3. Loss of Character - Dense, multi-storey blocks would irreversibly change the leafy character streetscapes and heritage character that make the Blue Mountains unique.

I am a long-term resident of Katoomba and the Blue Mountains and object to this development proposal for many important reasons.
The proposal lacks meaningful consultation. While an Aboriginal heritage impact statement was prepared, there is no evidence of direct engagement with Deerubbin Local Aboriginal Land Council or Gundungurra representatives. Community feedback appears selective, noting local opposition but omitting that of Blue Mountains City Council (BMCC) and the Blue Mountains Conservation Society. Broader community consultation is limited, despite the site’s proximity to an area of significant public use and future role as part of the BMCC Planetary Health Institute.
This development is oversized and incompatible with the character of Katoomba, introducing buildings of an unprecedented scale into a quiet residential area. More critically, the site itself is unsuitable. The Blue Mountains’ volatile hydrology poses significant risks to water quality in Sydney’s drinking catchment, and past nearby construction has already demonstrated environmental damage from runoff. These risks would be amplified by the scale of excavation required.
Geologically, the area’s unstable sandstone increases the likelihood of land movement and collapse, as seen in recent road failures and local seismic activity. Large-scale excavation would likely exacerbate these hazards.
The location is poorly serviced and fails basic principles of accessibility. It is 3 km from essential services, schools, and transport, with limited bus access, making residents heavily car dependent. Narrow Neck Rd’s constraints are in its name, it is narrow! It is also winding, and is a single-access area, which raises serious safety concerns, particularly during bushfire evacuations.
Bushfire risk is significant in this area and the recent rezoning of this area to a lesser grade of risk is questionable. Fires along Narrow Neck Rd occur regularly, most recently in 2019 when properties and access were impacted along Narrow Neck Rd and Cliff Drive. Adding another 215 households who must evacuate by car to this bottleneck will impact the safety of residents and the capacity of fire services to protect properties and life.
Claims of “affordable housing” are unclear and unlikely to meet local needs, given low median incomes and already high housing stress. The site is also distant from major employment hubs, undermining the social benefits typically associated with affordable housing.
Overall, the proposal is highly unsuitable for this location, poses environmental and safety risks, and offers limited benefit to the Katoomba community. It should be rejected.

I oppose the construction of residential flat building at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road in Katoomba. I don't think a development there will be beneficial for the upper Blue Mountains Area.

I object to the proposal. The assessment of the proposal is inadequate and does a poor job of assessing impacts, in particular impacts to the Blue Mountains National Park & World Heritage Area which is around 200m away. The proposal is inappropriate for the location and should be refused. See attached submission.

I've lived in the Blue Mountains since 1978, in Katoomba since 1988. One of the things I love about living here is the lack of the kind of high-density housing proposed in this application. Narrow Neck is at an edge of the escarpment. Aside from the affront to the natural environment and the lack of sympathy with much of the built environment, this proposal could prove to be very dangerous in times of bushfires. I've been to Narrow Neck Road when there have been fires, most recently in late 2019, and seen the damage to houses across the street from the valley.
People visit and move to the Mountains to get away from just this kind of thing!

I am a resident of the Blue Mountains in Blackheath. I moved here for the outstanding natural values that living on the edge of a world heritage area offers.
The four storey complexes that will comprise 214 residential and 52 serviced apartments are not appropriate developments in Katoomba for a number of reasons
1. Bush Fire risk - multi story development in an already high risk bushfire zone puts lives at risk and is not sensible planning. Evacuation challenges add to the problems for these and other residents.
2. Environmental damage - paving over previous surfaces and increasing stormwater runoff is undermining the ecological values that underpin our world heritage listing
3. Loss of unique leafy character streetscapes of the Blue Mountains
4. Economic consequences- if the local environment values are eroded, tourism may be impacted.

This is a critical moment to object strongly to this multi story development on the edge of a world heritage escapement.

I would be extremely upset to see a precedent for this type of development here in Katoomba. I know a lot of people in the local community who feel the same way.

Thank you
Georgina Baker
Blackheath

I object to the proposal for development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba that includes 266 apartments and commercial buildings.

The proposal will be devastating to our local community for the following reasons. It will:
- Put significant pressure on already strained local infrastructure, in particular roads which are currently at breaking point in the Central west region.
- Increase traffic congestion in Katoomba which currently barely functions as it is.
- Diminish the character and beauty of our region, impinging on the views across the escarpment and creating visual clutter by replacing the natural beauty with the ugliness of the built environment.
- Put the rest of the community at increased risk from fire danger as roads and infrastructure and escape routes during emergencies would be blocked and hampered by the additional builders, people, and visitors this proposal would entail.
- Further degrade an already strained ecosystem and put the UNESCO World Heritage site at further risk of degradation from over visitation and overuse.

As a local resident, I find this proposal and the process by which this proposal came about and is even being considered abhorrent. That AI processes were used to bypass usual Council process in order to establish this proposal as a State Significant Development (SSD) is heinous and this warrants an investigation. The precedent this is intended to set, thereby overruling development approvals by local council is anathema to how Local, State and Federal governments are supposed to work – which is, for its constituents.

That the NSW government’s Department of Planning is even considering this proposal and has initiated such an entity as the NSW Housing Delivery Authority (HAD) only shows how far the State government is willing to go to protect and enshrine corporate interests over those it is meant to be serving – constituents. This development proposal should never have been allowed to by-pass local Council approvals process. I strongly oppose the NSW State government’s Housing Delivery Authority (HDA) and firmly am of the opinion that the Blue Mountains, a significantly UNESCO World Heritage environment should be exempt from the HDA and SSD pathways in order to protect the sensitive environment and ecosystems that we live beside. More needs to be done to protect this area, not less.

We moved to the Blue Mountains because we do not want to be surrounded by buildings and man-made ugliness, we value a life where open vistas mean space to contemplate, where bids call and nature is allowed to exist. We moved to the Blue Mountains for this, where land use is human in scale and living is comfortable and community orientated. I reject the developers proposal to rezone this area for development as the scale of the area is currently human and this is what we want more of in our local area, not less. We do not want more Sydney sized developments and ugliness to fill the Blue Mountains, blocking every vista and filling every inch with buildings that will likely be sold to foreign investors.

As a community, we are under strain with broken roads, underfunded local support services, under-invested infrastructure and overburdened with Instagram tourists. This development would be significantly detrimental to the fragile ecosystem and community of the Katoomba and wider Blue Mountains area by adding strain and undue pressure on the area and community.

In conclusion, as a resident of the local community:
• I oppose the development proposal at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road Katoomba.
• I reject the HDA pathway for the Blue Mountains area and call for the Blue Mountains to be exempt from the HDA and,
• I call for an investigation into the use of AI to submit this proposal in the first place, bypassing and overriding local development approvals and the Blue Mountains Local Environment Plan (LEP).

What is needed by the State government and the NSW Planning Department is leadership and vision for how we can grow sustainably and at a human scale that benefits and builds community instead of profiting developers and investors.

I would be happy to be contacted to further assist in the decision-making against this proposal.

Yours sincerely;

Resident, Blackheath

I am writing to express my objection to the proposed development for the following reasons:
Bushfire Risk: High-density housing in a high-risk bushfire zone increases evacuation challenges and puts lives at risk.
Environmental Damage: Paving over pervious surfaces increases stormwater runoff, disrupting ecosystems and undermining the area's World Heritage listing.
Loss of Character: Dense, multi-storey blocks could irreversibly change the leafy character and heritage streetscapes.
Economic Consequences: Tourism relies on the natural environment and village character, and eroding these could harm the local economy.
The Blue Mountains is a sensitive area with unique environmental and cultural values, and it's crucial to balance development with conservation efforts.

I urge the planning authority to consider these concerns and reject the proposal in its current form.