It's so big, it will double the population within an 850 m radius of the development.
This is crazy; there are no services for this amount of people
-the closest station is 3 km away; under your own planning rules, mid-rise complexes need to be within 800 m of a station.
- there are NO FOOTPATHS to town in any direction. It's dangerous to walk on these roads now with blind crests, corners and no path; let alone if you double the traffic.
- Traffic will double; in this area, every adult really needs a car to get around. There is one bus stop, and the bus route is a loop in one direction; it's nearly quicker to walk into Katoomba than take the bus.
- It's too high, over the local government's EPA. This is a UNESCO World Heritage area, and they want to put 9 blocks of flats in the middle of it. People come here to get away from the city!
- Massive bushfire risk. The building may be in a low-risk area, but if they need to evacuate, it's toward a high/extremely high BAL zone. You are putting their lives, my family's, and my neighbours' at risk, as we all have to go past this development to escape.
- One of the buildings is basically a quasi-Airbnb hotel.
- There is no structure to the social housing, unlikely to happen.

I object to the proposed high density residential apartment development for the following reasons:
• The height, scale and density is out of character with the surrounding low density development of mountains cottages and cold climate gardens
• It will have a negative effect on the scenic, environmental and heritage values of Cliff Drive
• There isn't a similar development in the Mountains so it will create an unfortunate precedent
• It is a long way from existing transport links and amenities so will create traffic problems on narrow tourist roads
Affordable housing is a distraction as it makes up a small proportion and will revert to unaffordable housing in 5 years
If the State Government is serious about housing supply look at limiting the 1000-1700 air bnbs in the Mountains that sit idle most of the time and would otherwise be available for people being pushed out of the community
We trust the Dept of Planning will acknowledge that the Mountains are not just another suburb of Sydney
Regards,
Todd Berryman

I attach a word document outlining my objections to the proposal

Please see the attached pdf document for details of my objections to the proposal

My objections to this proposed development are set on many levels. These I have set out in point form:
- unsuitable site due to lack of entry and exit points to the site. There is essentially only one connective road, suburban and one lane in each direction. A development of this scale would overwhelm tourist and local traffic by the sheer number of large trucks and specialised equipment such as cranes and earth moving units needed to build it. Then would add several hundred extra vehicles accessing the site daily when operational.
- it is unsuitable due this being a fairly isolated site, 2-3 kilometres from highway entry, railway stations and shopping.
- for the proposed 400 to 500 inhabitants for this site ( it is unclear as to what form the “ 52 supported accommodation beds “ will be in. Is it an hotel, nursing home or hostel? ) they will be reliant on their own transport given the lack of other options and current limited bus service. Again it is several kilometres from town centre and rail options. There are very limited vacancy in the job market in the local area and work from home options, while promising are still in minority use. Otherwise it is hours drive or train ride to the closest parts of greater Sydney and the possibility of work.
- the nature of this proposed development is completely out of alignment with the area. It is essentially an intense city or suburban development ideally situated next to a transport hub that will be out of place in this location. It will dominate the area surrounding and will be an eyesore situated and visible from both town and national park given its proximity to the escarpment ( less than 100 metres from its southern and western sides ).
- it will increase pressure on local services such as health, ( hospital and GP ) education, police and other emergency services. Indeed the building of it will from the very beginning inhibit the SES center that is situated on the corner of Bathurst Road and Valley Road.
- the plans proposed destruction of the majority of trees on this site is offensive given the unclear nature of their appraisal and value. The actual location of many of them appears to be on land adjacent to the building site and again is abhorrent when it is occurring next to a World Heritage National Park.
It is likely in contravention to other departments, state and commonwealth and against the laws that they are beholden to, eg The Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1990.
- the companies budget for this development would approximate currently to about $ 200,000 per bedroom as cost price. With current fuel inflation and the effects this will have on building and supply costs it is unlikely it will be delivered anywhere near this cost price and will be unaffordable and this will likely impact on the affordable housing provisions they say they will provide. With the isolated nature of its location added, this project really needs a completely new realistic evaluation, redesign or relocation to areas it is suitable for.
Thank you for your consideration of theses concerns.

Refer attached

I have lived in Katoomba an environs for over 25 years now.
I remember I would often walk upon the land identified in the building proposal
I remember how it was land, bequethed in perpetuity to the public. I have been of late confused wondering how it is even posible to build on this land.
Be that as it may, this proposal is opposed by me, the local community, and even the combined band of political elites.
At no point does this proposal match the character, image and markatable value of Katoomba as the rustic, picturesque and popular tourist destination.
This proposal would not be acceptable under local council planning laws.
This proposal would not be acceptable even to standard state codes of planning laws and long term development of the area.
Katoomba is a resource-stretched village in an internationally acclaimed national park.
This proposal is against the spirit of the national park and against the traditional codes and practices of builiding new housing in a precarious and precious national park.

For more than 30 years the local government, along with community consultation, has developed an appropriate Local Environment Plan (LEP) and Developmental Control Plan (DCP) to safeguard the environmentally sensitive ecosystems of the Blue Mountains Environment. This development proposal would in all likelihood harm the surrounding environment, threaten lives and create traffic, bushfire and evacuation risks.

I cannot believe this proposal would be endorsed with the traditional custodians of the area. Those elders I know are against this.
The proposed development is a ‘folly’ in character, impact and taste.
There is no building in the whole Blue Mountains catchment that is as ugly and out of the character of the place, more than this disturbing proposal
Should this proposal go ahead, it would be seen as a blot on the character of Australia’s premier tourist destination village.