To whom it may concern
I am resident at a property adjacent to the proposed development.

I am in opposition to the proposed development for the following reasons;

- There was no community consultation/proper notification of direct neighbours in development of this proposal.
Although the developer claims to have contacted neighbouring properties by letterbox drop last year to engage in relation to the proposal, I have received no such notification/invitation.
- This is a huge over development for the site, being 4 levels each ,of nine buildings ; at least twice what is allowable for any other development in the Blue Mts.
Directly adjacent to the site proposed is a well - used community recreational area,(formerly the Katoomba Golf Course, now Planetary Health Precint& Parklands) This proposal is a complete contradiction of this worthy initiative by BMCC, and contravenes local planning regulations in regards to height & floor space ratios. It will also visually dominate/overwhelm that corner of the park for public use and amenity of the parklands.
- Although being put as a development to address the affordable/low income housing much needed in this community & others, it seems it will actually provide very little affordable/low income housing. A proper use of this SSD pathway would utilise the underutilised properties in Katoomba town centre for this purpose , much closer to public transport & essential services.
- There is only one bus service which runs on the hour, and only daytimes, to serve as public transport . The result of this proposal will be an inevitable increase in traffic/car usage in the area, predominately on Stuarts Rd, Cliff Dr, Glencoe Ave and surrounding suburban streets.
- There is no attention to the fact in the proposal that it is sitting on one of the many sources of the Sydney Water Catchment, the Katoomba Falls Catchment Area and has potential to have detrimental effect on the natural environment adjacent.
I re-iterate that I object strongly to this proposal as displayed , and the corruption of the SSD planning pathway to achieve it.
Regards,
David Mills
65 Stuarts Rd
Katoomba
NSW 2780

I have lived in the Blue Mountains for the past 40 years and know and love the area well. The protection of the natural environment with its sensitive ecology is vitally important and this proposal would have a massive impact and set a precedent for future inappropriate and destructive development. Everything we do on the plateau impacts the surrounding Blue Mountains National Park and World Heritage Area. This proposal would override the important, careful and expert local planning which is a result of years of research and effort.

As a resident I am experiencing the huge increase in traffic congestion and am even more concerned than before about an evacuation in the case of bushfire or other emergency. With the recent closure of the Mt Victoria Pass and no chance of any short term solution it makes an escape to the west almost impossible. I understand more housing is necessary but to allow this development would be folly.

I strongly oppose the proposed development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road and I also oppose the use of the Housing Delivery Authority( HDA) pathway and request that the Blue Mountains Local Government Area be exempted from the HDA pathway.

Yours sincerely,
Joan Crawley

please see my attachment for reasons for my opposition to this resort project.

I write to formally and strongly oppose the above State Significant Development application SSD-86456706 at 142–150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba. This proposal is deeply flawed across every relevant area for development and fails on planning grounds, environmental grounds, legal grounds, and on basic standards of community consultation. I urge the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to reject this application entirely without modification. There are ten significant deficiencies outlined below and none of them is trivial. Taken together, they are a recipe for disaster for the people of Blue Mountains and for the Envrionment. The deficiencies are:
1. Massive Overdevelopment That Defies Planning Controls
The proposed building height of 15.6 metres and floor space ratio of 1.2:1 are double the limits permitted under the Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan 2015. This is not a minor variation — it exceeds the Housing Delivery Authority's own 20% variation threshold by a factor of five. Granting approval would set a dangerous precedent that renders the LEP meaningless and undermines the integrity of the entire planning framework that exists to protect this unique region.

2. Unacceptable and Reckless Bushfire Risk
Placing more than 500 residents on a site where every evacuation route passes through bushfire-prone land is an act of recklessness that cannot be justified by housing targets or developer ambition. The application is critically deficient: it lacks a mandatory strategic bushfire study and fails to demonstrate compliance with NSW Rural Fire Service consultation requirements. In the context of increasingly severe fire seasons, approving a high-density residential development with no safe evacuation corridor would be unconscionable. This failure alone warrants outright refusal.

3. Irreversible Violation of Escarpment and World Heritage Protections
The site falls within a Protected Area Escarpment. High-rise buildings constructed here will be visible from the Greater Blue Mountains UNESCO World Heritage Area — one of Australia's most treasured and internationally recognised landscapes. The long-standing planning controls protecting these escarpment views exist precisely to prevent this kind of visual intrusion. Approving this development would cause permanent, irreversible harm to a landscape of global significance.

4. Serious Threats to Biodiversity and Native Habitat
The proposal requires the clearing of 5,000 square metres of native bushland and threatens the habitat of the critically endangered Blue Mountains Dwarf Pine. Despite the gravity of these ecological impacts, no Biodiversity Development Assessment Report has been provided — a mandatory requirement under NSW planning law. The absence of this report alone renders the application incomplete and non-compliant. Proceeding without it would be both legally indefensible and environmentally irresponsible.

5. Risk of Contamination to Sydney's Drinking Water
The site lies within the Sydney Drinking Water Catchment. The application provides no adequate stormwater management strategy, despite the fact that runoff from this development would flow into protected swamps and ultimately toward Warragamba Dam. Any contamination of this catchment poses a public health risk of the highest order. This is not a technical oversight that can be conditioned away — it reflects a fundamental incompatibility between this development and its location.

6. Housing Targets Used to Justify Bypassing Environmental Safeguards
The approximately 270 dwellings proposed represent nearly half of the entire Blue Mountains region's five-year housing target — concentrated on a single site. This is precisely the kind of outcome the State Government sought to avoid when it excluded the Blue Mountains from high-density housing reforms, recognising the area's unique environmental hazards. This application attempts to circumvent that deliberate policy decision. The housing crisis is real, but it does not justify placing hundreds of residents in harm's way on environmentally sensitive land.

7. Design That Fails Its Own Future Residents
The proposal does not meet basic Apartment Design Guide standards. Nearly 40% of units will receive inadequate sunlight and natural ventilation — conditions that are not merely uncomfortable but harmful to long-term physical and mental health. The design also fails to respond to the site's steep topography and does not address heat island risks. This is not housing worthy of the name; it is the imposition of substandard dwellings in an inappropriate location.

8. Unlawful Claim of Height Bonus
The developer has claimed a 30% height bonus on the basis of providing affordable housing. However, the proposal delivers only 11% affordable gross floor area — well below the 15% legal minimum required to qualify for this bonus. This is not a rounding error or an ambiguity; it is a straightforward failure to meet the legal threshold. The height bonus must be withdrawn, and the application assessed on its actual merits without it.

9. Consultation That Was Tokenistic and Legally Inadequate
The community consultation process yielded only six responses — a result that speaks not to community acceptance but to a process that was inadequate by design. Most critically, Blue Mountains City Council was not notified of the application, despite being an adjoining landowner with a direct and significant interest in the outcome. The Council's planned Planetary Health Precinct — a project of regional importance — will be severely impacted by this development. Excluding the Council from consultation is not a procedural oversight; it undermines the legitimacy of the entire process.

10. Unresolved Legal Conflicts That Render the Application Invalid
The application fails to disclose existing development consents and title restrictions — specifically DA X98/095 — that create material legal conflicts for the site. Transparency and full disclosure are fundamental requirements of the planning system. An application that conceals or omits known legal encumbrances cannot be considered a valid or good-faith submission and should be refused on this basis alone.

I call on the Department to refuse this application in full and to send a clear signal that the Blue Mountains' unique environmental, cultural, and heritage values will not be traded away under the guise of housing delivery.

Yours sincerely,
Luciana Carusi

To whom it may concern,
I am writing as a local resident born in the Blue Mountains to strongly object to the proposed residential flat building development at 142-150 Narrow Neck Road, Katoomba NSW.
I have chosen not to leave the Blue Mountains as I appreciate the natural environment, unique character of the area and the flora and fauna of a UNESCO World Heritage site. This proposal is completely out of place for a World Heritage site.
The proposed development is simply too invasive for this location based on the building mass, height and excessive number of units.
Narrow Neck Road is located close to the escarpment and surrounding bushland which is a scenic and environmentally sensitive area. Approving a large scale apartment style complex here would permanently change this sensitive area and set a dangerous precedent for future oversized developments in Katoomba.
Traffic and road safety are major concerns as Narrow Neck already experiences congestion, particularly during school holidays, weekends and peak tourist periods. Parking is another major concern that cannot be ignored.
Developments of this scale almost always result in overflow parking onto surrounding streets, regardless of what is proposed on paper.
The Blue Mountains is the most visited National Park in NSW and this development will detract from the very qualities that draw in visitors from around the world. We do not want to jeopardize the uniqueness of the area.
The environmental impacts are also deeply concerning. The Blue Mountains is an area with significant biodiversity and bushfire risks. Large scale excavation, vegetation removal, increased hard surfaces and higher population density all place additional pressure on the surrounding environment. Once mature trees and habitat are removed, they simply cannot be replaced overnight with landscaping plans.
Bushfire risk is another serious issue that deserves attention. The site is located within an area where bushfire danger is a genuine concern. Increasing residential density in this area raises questions about evacuation, emergency access and community safety during extreme weather events.
Water runoff and drainage should be carefully considered. Katoomba already experiences issues with stormwater runoff during heavy rainfall. Large developments with extensive hard surfaces can worsen runoff, erosion and downstream impacts. Given the steep terrain and sensitive environment of the Blue Mountains, these concerns should not be underestimated.
I am extremely concerned about the visual impact of this proposal. A large residential flat building dominating the landscape will be totally out of character with the surrounding street scape and undermine the natural beauty of the area.
While I understand the need for additional housing, I do not believe this is the right location for a development of this scale.
For all the reasons I have outlined, I strongly oppose the proposed development and respectfully ask that this application be refused.
Thank for considering my submission.
Yours sincerely,
Dianne Stockley

test

I think the proposed residential flat buildings at 142–150 Narrow Neck Road in Katoomba are problematic for a number of reasons. One of the main issues is that the scale of the development feels completely out of place for the area. Katoomba is known for its low-density, natural environment, and introducing multiple large apartment buildings with over 200 dwellings doesn’t really fit with that character.

Another major concern is the environmental impact. The site is located close to the Blue Mountains World Heritage area, so any large-scale development risks damaging local ecosystems through vegetation clearing and habitat loss. I think this is especially important given how significant the area is from both an ecological and tourism perspective.

The bushfire risk is also hard to ignore. The Blue Mountains is already a high-risk area, and increasing the number of people living there, particularly in a location with limited access roads, could create serious safety issues. In an emergency situation, evacuation could become congested and dangerous.

On top of that, the development is likely to put additional pressure on local infrastructure, especially roads. With more residents and visitors, traffic congestion could become a real problem, again raising concerns not just for convenience but also for emergency access.

While the proposal does include some affordable housing, it seems like only a small portion of the development is actually dedicated to that. A lot of it appears to be serviced apartments, which may not really address the long-term housing needs of the local community.

Finally, I think the fact that it’s being assessed as a State Significant Development is an issue in itself. It limits the ability of the local council and community to have real input into the decision, which doesn’t seem appropriate for a project that will have such a big impact on the area.

Overall, it just seems like the development prioritises density and profit over environmental protection, safety, and the existing character of Katoomba.

I strongly object to this proposed building development!
We live in The Blue Mountains and respect our World Heritage Environment. The impact of such a huge, concrete eyesore would be catastrophic on The Blue Mountains as we know it. Our flora and fauna, the delicate ecosystems that exist in undisturbed bushland would be dangerously impacted upon. Our listing as a World Heritage area would be in complete jeopardy !! We could lose it forever.
There would be huge risks in times of bushfires- the evacuation of such a large population on congested roads would worsen the already chaotic situation.
We chose to live in The Blue Mountains because of its pristine bushland, the unique wildlife and unpolluted air. We refuse to allow such a development and the precedent that it would set to destroy the environment in which we live and respect.
I object in the strongest manner to this building proposal!!!

It has come to our attention that the above that this State Significant Development has been all of a sudden been removed from a bushfire risk zone. Why? While you'll receive many similar objections from residents affected in the area, we are also concerned that this will set a precedent for other similar high-density developments across the Blue Mountains. We have a very narrow corridor from the lower mountains to the upper mountains and putting additional strain on our environment. We want to attach people for its beauty NOT a BLOCH on our landscape. Also, as uses of Katoomba for shopping what should be put on as a State Significant Development is Yeaman Bridge access into the township. This has been an absolute nightmare for years. This only further deter attracting people to our World Heritage Area.