All recent comments on applications from Blue Mountains City Council, NSW

I agree totally with Rob McFadden's comments above. I have submitted a submission to council re the previous plan. Now the applicant has submitted an amended plan which involves the removal of 12 large Conifers beside the fire station and a substantial tree at rear of block. This proposal degrades the Leura Mall streetscape. These and any other substantial trees should not be removed. The huge excavation for an underground carpark will have implications into the future.

This development should not go ahead. This will bring more traffic, parking etc which is already at a premium. Also many established trees will be removed which will destroy the streetscape.

Sorry, but this development has no place whatsoever in Leura or anywhere else in the mountains. In fact for all the reasons others have mentioned, in my opinion, it would be a disaster. Leura locals are suffering enough with the massive increase in non-resident traffic. It would make life impossible with the extra numbers/traffic one would expect from this development.

This space is continuously fighting to be built on and all residents keep on rejecting it because it does not suit our little Leura. We do not need another hotel/motel. I do also live in close proximity to east view and my 4 children catch the bus and walk the area to and from school. This space should be made a beautiful picnic park for kids and families.
It keeps getting sold from one person to another and plans they keep proposing are falling on deaf ears for good reason.
This is not a space for big business.

This development should not proceed at all.
It is for no benefits to the local community or the Blue Mountains. This is over development in a residential area , that will only serve a small minority of wealthy tourists not add to the local community.
It is not in keeping with the area and it designed to give the newest owners opportunities to make money at the cost of local residents living conditions.
This should be stopped at all cost . .

What an ugly and inappropriate development for this area. I would not call such a large development an “eco-tourist facility” when it is proposed for a quiet, residential area surrounded by bush land. It is uniquely beautiful and this proposed monstrosity will destroy the ambience and character that residents and visitors enjoy. The term “eco-tourist facility” used in conjunction with this proposal is farcical.

An eco-tourism development in a local residential area is only in the interests of the developers, not the residents. More people, without a vested interest in community-building, will detract from the nature of the residential area and put additional strains on council in maintaining substructures. The area is already challenged with traffic congestion from locals and parking is problematic. This development will create long time issues for residents, and for BMCC, as they try to maintain services and deal with complaints from residents. Seems the only winner will be the developer!

Having lived in Eastview Avenue for over 4 decades, I am totally appalled that this huge development would ever be considered. The parking around the top of Eastview is dreadful and making the street a narrow one way street in the Brightlands area.
Residents in this area are restricted to the DA that they can lodge to BMCC, so WHY is this group different and potentially allowed to have a DA approved that does not have a heritage appearance.

This development should not go ahead. It will cause increased traffic, disruption and environmental deterioration to the place. Parking is already a problem in the area.

As a resident of Eastview Avenue, I am staunchly against this proposed development.

The current misuse of our street for parking of attendees at Brightlands Retreat is already causing safety concerns for pedestrians & residents.

Brightlands Retreat have received several complaints and comments about their empty car spaces while our street is clogged with parked cars attending the venue and have yet to do anything to resolve just that one issue.

It is clear from their lack of response or redirection of their clientele's vehicles that the safety of our street is not important.

This proposal will increase the strain on our already crumbling roads (most of which have no guttering or paths) to a level that will be untenable - both for residents attempting to get to their homes and our streets which are narrow and disintegrating.

Eastview Avenue is no place for a huge cabin/hotel-like complex of any kind - this proposal is way outside the scope of what our little corner of Leura can adequately handle - with safety and care for our residents AND the environment.

My family, neighbours and I are all against this proposal.

This development should be opposed, because it is incompatible with the existing streetscapes. It would also detract from the residents’ amenity.

As residents of Eastview Avenue who have not previously commented we wish to add our voices to protest this development as being inappropriate in a quiet heritage area where the roads are crumbling due to existing traffic and the terrible weather without increased traffic.

This development has no business going ahead in Leura, or anywhere in the Blue Mountains. It does not take into account the residential location, the lack of infrastructure, or the architectural style of the area.
Blue Mountains City Council has a responsibility to the community and history of the upper mountains to preserve the feel, architecture, and residential amenities. This development brings nothing positive to Leura, and should be unanimously opposed.

As residents of Eastview Avenue who have not previously commented we wish to add our voices to protest this development as being inappropriate in a quiet heritage area where the roads are crumbling due to existing traffic and the terrible weather without increased traffic.

This development should NOT go ahead:
The reasons have already been stated, and the nearby residents are opposed to it with 14 adverse comments on the original application.
Let's be very clear here, these are NOT eco-pods... they are enormous monolithic two storey motel rooms - 13 of them.
The look like crashed UFOs or brutalist Stalinist monuments from the 1950s and do not fit in a 'period housing' area with Edwardian era cottages.
They do not belong in a quiet residential area.
The second levels will overlook adjoining residential properties.
There is already an issue with high-powered outdoor lighting in use 24/7 which has been the subject of previous complaints.
There will be additional noise from up to 50 guests and the cooks, cleaners, waiters, receptionists, admin etc.
Eastview Ave, Mount Street and East Parade are narrow streets with no gutters or footpaths, and could not cope with the increased traffic and parking.
Up to 50 guests and around 30 staff coming and going represents over 160 more vehicle movements a day - possibly more if they come and go multiple times a day.
There will be large delivery vehicles amongst them will be difficult to manoeuvre in the narrow streets.
These streets have several sharp corners and doglegs which are a safety hazard for both vehicles and pedestrians.
The verges are crumbling and vehicles visiting this establishment already clog the streets parking and churning up the nature strips which are muddy due to all the rain.
Noting that numerous cars already park on the street while the few spaces inside the establishment remain empty.
Increased traffic will pose a safety hazard for the numerous residents who walk with dogs and children on the road due to no footpaths and muddy crumbling verges.
Car parking on site is manifestly inadequate for all the staff and guests.
Numerous established trees that act as windbreaks will be removed.
I strongly object to this development.

Good afternoon.

I'm concerned that this proposal is amongst beautiful bushland, and yet does not outline how it will add and not subtract from local wildlife. Native garden plans? Solar panels? How many trees will need to be cut down, will new trees then be planted to replace them? Etc. A 450k two story proposal I feel risks the style of the Blue Mountains, as there are so few other two story houses. Such grand proposals in the middle of bushland, I feel have an obligation to really outline how they will benefit our environment in some way.

Thank you for listening to and hopefully considering my concerns.

Without repeating all the other comments about this development being completely inappropriate for the adjoining Leura shopping area, it just shows that the BIG mistake was letting the Ritz be changed to a nursing home years ago, and if it was kept as a hotel/guest house we probably would not be having this dialogue now.

The increase in density, height and scale proposed by the developers of the old Ritz in Leura conflicts with the heritage protections and streetscape in place at sites along and in properties surrounding Leura Mall, even if there are new "wings" attached to the old frontage. The development as a whole would greatly impact on and likely destroy the current character of Leura Village. The increased height proposed in particular means the building will overlook and be seen from Katoomba to the west and from much of residential south Leura. The proposal for a huge age care facility of this nature virtually on top of the tourist shopping and resident services centre of Leura Village at a critical through traffic point represents a direct conflict in possible land uses and incompatible development needs that include in particular a likely highly detrimental increase in traffic and service vehicles associated with no capacity to manage in any meaningful sense. The current Leura traffic management proposal, to move the tourist buses onto Grose Street, at the expense of small business and a multitude of residential services, will not remove the existing and future traffic management problem and there will be potential "gridlock" as a result of this development on the scale proposed. The residential amenity in surrounding streets to the south east and west in particular will be destroyed by traffic, parking by others and loss of privacy. The existing residential and tourist amenity of south Leura will be compromised. As it is now several years since the old Ritz "nursing home" facility operated and a new tourism landscape post COVID and changes in Australias foreign affairs and trade relations, the project should be reassessed with a focus to return to the traditional historical long term use of this site for boutique hotel stay and a more suitable site found for contemporary and future age care housing needs. Perhaps the developers should be encouraged to study the successful low impact Morven Gardens model.

We feel that this development is not in keeping with the village’s aesthetic. New proposed redevelopment should be inspired by the original outstanding architecture of the Ritz building. In this particular location close to Leura Mall the new development or part of it should also include the tourist facilities. We would like to suggest to redesign part of the building and accommodate new shops, restaurant maybe small boutique hotel. The Ritz should be part of the Leura Village, attracting the tourists and local people. This is for sure not a place for nursing home only. Also the modern appearance of the new wings of the building should be redesign to match the heritage appearance of the main Ritz building. Hopefully Council will consider all the above concerns.
Kind regards,
Barbara & Darek Szymanski

I am writing this as a frequent visitor to my mother’s house in Leura because I am extremely concerned about the potential for this development to set a negative precedent for Leura village.

Her home, Wascoe street and Leura village is currently under threat due to a development proposal for the ‘The Ritz’.

Mum’s cottage (which is itself a locally significant heritage property) shares two boundaries with the Ritz, and will bear the brunt of the high density ‘wing’ buildings proposed.

It seems from neighbouring residents and Leura locals we've been chatting to, most locals if they have 'thought' about the Ritz redevelopment at all:

1. Are under the misapprehension it's simply restoring the existing heritage buildings that comprised the old nursing home (ie within the current buildings) and don't realise the scope of the new glass and brick Wing buildings for 123 one bedroom units with ensuites planned for the rear of the property along quiet Wascoe Street. Notwithstanding its proposed new use as a ‘residential aged care’ facility it will be the equivalent of putting a multi-storey hotel or apartment block in the heart of Leura village.

2. Believe Council is the consent authority (rather than the Sydney Western Planning Panel) and thus may not appreciate that even if Council are sympathetic to resident concerns and wish to uphold the LEP and DCP controls they may be overridden by the Planning Panel members who of course do not reside or work in the Blue Mountains.

Another ‘live’ issue for Leura and Council is the Culgoa hotel proposal also on Leura Mall and recently refused, which only sought to exceed the density controls by around 20%. By contrast the developer Pathways is seeking variations of more than 66% for density (increase to the ‘floor to space’ ratio) and up to 58% increase in height than the long standing controls for the Ritz site and ‘zone’ contemplate.

I believe this is a cynical attempt to claim adaptive reuse of heritage buildings that is masquerading as fulfilling a ‘need’ for luxury seniors housing to get up an extremely overbuilt set of modern buildings that will devastate and detract from the special character of Leura village.

Also worsening traffic, parking issues and the strain that an additional 123 elderly and complex healthcare needs residents will put on the already struggling Blue Mountains District Anzac Memorial Hospital where there is no emergency surgery has not been seriously addressed by the revised DA.

Neither has there been any information about an upgrade to 'local' road Wascoe Street which will be turned into a busy thoroughfare. The developer's traffic study (that is not updated) was conducted on Friday 4 December 2020 during the COVID lockdowns, and claims to be representative of a typical week day in Leura. The lockdown restrictions for NSW were not lifted until Monday 7 December.

Finally this does nothing to advance Council's priority for affordable or social housing for seniors - it will be run as an up market luxury facility. Council should consider adding a condition that some rooms are designated for social or affordable housing.

The restoration of the Ritz is overdue and important, but it should not be at the expense of neighbouring residents amenity or at the cost of weakening other heritage and development controls. A scaled back development will hopefully achieve a situation that all parties can live with.

The size of the proposed redevelopment of the Ritz is not in accordance with the height of other buildings for the area. The use of Wascoe street and the impact on surrounding residents is not in accordance with the village of Leura . The aim of an ‘exclusive’ aged care facility is also not community minded and isn’t in keeping with the needs of the Blue Mountains community . We do have an aging population but this facility is not aimed as providing accommodation for local blue mountains elderly but at ‘wealthy’ people with expensive hotel style aged care . This will have a negative impact on local community, will increase traffic to the borders of a residential area and give back nothing to the community. The area around the Ritz is a traffic and parking hazard area as it is . This is not needed in Leura .

This should be converted back to a hotel/motel accommodation... with a nice pub and beer garden at the front. With three other new motel accommodations proposed, why not revert this to a hotel? Better to have the accommodation here than the proposed monoliths at Brightlands which is in a residential area. The Ritz should be renovated in the style of the Carrington for both tourists and locals to enjoy.

I feel this development is not in keeping with the village’s aesthetic which is an essential aspect of the villages tourism industry. Efforts should be made to keep to the original design of the building as much as practical

Even if on site parking is mandated for this tourist accomodation development as it should be (like any other development) there is no pedestrian access to either Leura or Katoomba and no way of preventing tourists taking their vehicles along quiet residential streets to access Leura village, then on to south Katoomba escarpment attractions and elsewhere in the upper mountains. Why would they and where is the incentive for them to just catch a shuttle bus to Leura Mall? Is the developer proposing to only accept tourists who arrive by public transport ? If the current Leura tourist bus traffic management proposal ( to replace all car vehicle parking, including residents, tourists and service vehicles for the disability group and the childcare centre plus staff parking for numerous medical, accounting and other small businesses, in Grose Street with tourist bus parking only and to channel tourist buses coming west to east along the highway past the current entrance at Leura Mall to enter and exit via residential Scott Ave and Railway Pde and channel tourist bus traffic from the new toilet facilities and lake recreation at Wentworth Falls, in addition to buses on route direct on the highway east to west, to and from Leura along residential Scott Ave and Railway Pde and even further movement from Leura to south Katoomba sites before return to the highway through residential Katoomba and Leura ) the development will cause more tourist vehicle traffic congestion in Leura Mall and surrounding residential streets where they will have to compete for less car parks with Grose Street removed and with any tourist buses who cannot fit or do not want to park in Grose Street and according to the Council cannot be told where they must or must not park. Traffic management ?

As a heritage property, I find this proposal unsympathetic to the conservation of the property bust also the street. The increased traffic will be difficult for this particular area as a blind and narrow avenue, and I question the status of an “eco friendly” guest house that encourages the use of cars to begin with. Further, this was my family’s guest house in the early eighties, named the “Little Company Guest House” and because of this I know the history and difficulties of the property, none of which are regarded in this proposal.