Please see attached submission

As a long-term resident of the Lower Blue Mountains, I am deeply concerned about the proposed multi-storey development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba. The Environmental Impact Statement for this project makes it clear that the scale—over 200 apartments—is out of character with the unique, natural landscape of our community. My parents moved to the Blue Mountains in the early 1960s, drawn to it by the tranquillity, bushland, and the vibrant local culture that makes the Blue Mountains a special place to raise family and connect with community. I am local – born and bred.
What matters most to me is the preservation of our environment and the character of Katoomba. This development threatens both. Its proximity to bushfire-prone land raises serious safety concerns, and the visual impact of such a large complex would forever alter the look and feel of the town. The Mountains are internationally renowned for their scenic beauty. The area is recognised as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Introducing a high-density project risks undermining that legacy for current and future generations.
I am also troubled by the fast-tracked process, with only a short period for community submissions. This approach, facilitated by the Housing Delivery Authority pathway, sidelines local voices and may lead to rapid approval without adequate scrutiny. The lack of genuine affordable housing options in the proposal further erodes its claimed benefits—this project does not meet the needs of local residents, but instead caters to outside interests.
This development would affect my family and community by increasing pressure on local infrastructure, threatening our bushland, and diminishing the visual character that makes Katoomba unique. I strongly oppose the proposal and urge the Consent Authority reject the HDA pathway in the Blue Mountains. I also request that the Blue Mountains Local Government Area be exempted from this process, and recommend a thorough site visit to consider the full environmental and social impacts before any decision is made.

This information is also on the attached letterhead.
We oppose the proposed development for Residential Flat Buildings at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba.
This is about placing hundreds of people in a bushfire-prone area with limited evacuation routes and overriding long-standing local planning controls that have protected our unique landscape for decades.
This development is larger, at least two stories higher, than anything currently permitted in the Blue Mountains. It would diminish the character of Katoomba, including views towards the escarpment. However more importantly it has the potential to increase pressure on local infrastructure, particularly roads; worsen traffic congestion; increase bushfire risk, particularly during evacuation; and degrade the natural environment, including sensitive and protected ecosystems.
This development seeks to double both the height and the density permitted under our Local Environmental Plan. This would make the development highly visible from the Blue Mountains National Park, part of the Greater Blue Mountains World Heritage Area.
Cliff Drive and Narrow Neck Road are, in their present state, unsuitable to support the amount of traffic this would generate. No footpaths, no kerb and guttering, narrow with no pull-off area for bus stops and misplaced and non-existent storm water drains. The turnoff from Bathurst Road to Narrow Neck Road is steepling inclined and unsuitable for long and heavy vehicles.
When Harry Hammond wanted to build a hotel in the area in the early 1970s, he was told that the sewer could not possibly take the flow that would be generated. That sewer is still the same as it was then. Scenic World recently had to instal very expensive water tanks and pump systems for fire protection because Sydney Water could not guarantee water supply in time of bushfires. Surely this would also need to apply to the proposed new development.

This project is an over development that does not fit the ongoing need for medium density and low income residences. Instead, it places itself as a high end hotel with conference facilities. It would also erode the natural wonder of Narrow Neck that sits beside Blue Mountains National Park. This is a greedy development proposal that appropriates the 'need more housing' movement. I object to this proposal.

The reason I moved to the mountains is for it's charm and nature. I believe this development undermines what makes the mountains special.
The building itself is hyper-modern and dominates the landscape. With it's serviced apartments, it appears to be more geared towards tourists than residents or those who intend to make the mountains a home.

The infrastructure we have in Katoomba and the mountains in general is already overrun (seen by the traffic commonly at the roundabout near the family hotel, and our now multiple month closure of Vic pass).

I believe this proposal is unsustainable, charmless and serves to make investors money at the cost of Katoomba residents.

I would be much more open to a development that is in a less ecologically sensitive zone (eg. North Katoomba), designed with old world charm, with apartments for permanent living for current residents, and matched with road upgrades for katoomba and the greater mountains area.

While I support the idea of more residential higher density housing across the Blue Mountains, I object to the proposed location. These types of buildings should be constructed near to town centres and public transport. They should not be built on the urban fringe, nor on the edge of an escarpment above the bush (world heritage listed national park no less). I understand the mitigation against fire, construction waste, storm water runoff, sewer, etc, but you cannot mitigate against the visual impact. The Blue Mountains are recognised globally for their stunning vistas, so much so that the scenic value has been proposed as a world heritage value (in addition to the existing world heritage values). This proposal would erode that value and set a disturbing precedent for the development of the escarpment which has resisted this kind of development for decades.
Again, I support the development of more residential and higher density housing across the Blue Mountains, but I strongly object to the proposed location.

Inappropriate planning pathway - The HDA process 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 - Paving over pervious surfaces, increasing stormwater runoff and disrupts 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.
Economic consequences - Tourism relies on our natural environment and village character. If these are eroded, so too is the foundation of our local economy.

The proposed development is highly inappropriate, given severe bushfire risk, inadequate evacuation routes, visual impact on the World Heritage landscape, and inconsistent scaling.