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

The proposed height, setbacks, massing, building material choice, colour of finishes and design of the buildings combined together will dominate the surrounds and will not positively respond to the surrounding context.

The proposed setbacks design and massing of the buildings combined together will unreasonably impact upon the character of the area.

The proposal fails to respond to off site amenity of surrounding properties, resulting in unreasonable visual bulk and overshadowing impacts.

The proposal would result in unacceptable internal amenity.

The use and buildings are of a scale and intensity which will result in unreasonable amenity impacts on the neighbouring properties.

The scale, lack of setbacks and lack of landscaping all contribute to an overdevelopment of the site.

The proposal fails to provide adequate landscaping opportunities consistent with the areas character, it includes non native vegetation that may become environmentally invasive and it fails to ensure ensure suitable maintenance of native vegetation including trees of local provenance.

The proposed use and development, having regard to the site and surrounding area, would represent an inappropriate planning outcome.

The proposal has not dealt adequately with contemporary best practice environmentally sustainable outcomes in context of glazing, insulation, building and roofing materials, energy use, rainwater capture in context of local annual precipitation, preventing entry of litter to stormwater drains through suitable pollutant traps and screens, internal amenity, light pollution and spill from the development and protecting residents from off site sources of light spill, solar access, water use and runoff of precipitation from the site.

Lavatories lack best practice sustainability and it's sought if the projects approved that a condition of consent is imposed to fit only 6 star lavatories from a recognised supplier, in conjunction with the Drainwave device or a suitable equivalent.

Proposed capacity for rainwater capture is considered too low based on annual precipitation data for the region, the number of bedrooms in each dwelling and it's not considered contemporary best practice unless pressurised and delivers rain water to laundry and garden supply and lavatories. I would contemplate as appropriate a minimum capacity of 3000 litres per dwelling.

The proposal has not dealt adequately with proper parking provision for residents and visitors to avoid unacceptable amenity impacts to its occupants and surrounding area residents.

The proposal does not adequately contemplate sufficient waste disposal and it's submitted that as a minimum there be provided in a lot unless it's occupied by its owner, a 120 litre weekly general or 240 litre fortnightly general refuse service, together with standard recycling and green/food waste to be provided to each lot as condition of consent.

The proposal had not adequately contemplated suitable external lighting to avoid spill of light affecting other occupants within the site and lots neighbouring the site.

The proposal lacks sufficient information about solar access impacts and environmental effects.

The removal of the trees represents a loss to the community which is unacceptable with the reality of climate change.

The proposal does not provide any paved areas upon whole of the verge for the thoroughfare of pedestrians.

Development consent should be refused or in the alternative rigorous consent conditions imposed that contemplate the matters raised in my submissions.

Nothing in North Katoomba needs to be two stories. Let's keep the natural landscape visible with one story houses and eco friendly designs. Two stories is completely unnecessary design in Katoomba, it obstructs views and has little consideration for the existing heritage of the landscape. Thank you

This is a complete overdevelopment of the site which will add to the already congested traffic in the Mall and around the village.We should be preserving the village atmosphere of Leura,not destroying it.

This development will simply further burden the existing traffic congestion that plagues Leura. Tourism is the life blood of local business and the upper mountains community but developments like this must be deferred until an appropriate traffic management plan is implemented and the ongoing lack of parking is addressed.

As a regular user of the three main pedestrian crossings that service the Mall area, I experience semi-regular “near misses” in which cars have had to break suddenly to miss me or simply not seen me due to the traffic disarray, poor signage and inadequate lighting. Let’s hope the school children, elderly and other residents and visitors don’t have to pay the price for Council’s apparent unwillingness to deal with a self-evident risk.

By all means build hotels and the like to welcome people to our community, but improve the traffic, parking and other infrastructure FIRST. Please also ensure that such hotels align with and improves the aesthetic of a community that is over a century old - something which, in my opinion, this particular development rather spectacularly fails to achieve.

This is the third multi story hotel that has been dumped on Leura in the last few months, two of which will occupy sites that have existing buildings classified as heritage, even the railway station is heritage, all unfortunately local and not state. I have lived here for nearly 30 years, there has been never been any planning for Leura and a traffic plan has never been completed. I have no objection to increased tourism, however this is not the place for this type of occupancy. The community has been thrown under the bus, fortunately, the bus is not moving as it is caught up in the bottleneck of Leura. My road was never meant to carry the traffic it now carries, we risk our lives for a carton of milk and a loaf of bread. Leura is contained within the strategic hub of Katoomba, which generates 100% funding and it is my view Leura and Katoomba should be considered a single entity and planning and implementation taken over by the state government, due to the high volumes of tourism in both towns. There are no pedestrian crossings between the shops at the northern end or from the railway station, the verbal answer always has been if vehicles are slowed it will inconvenience motorists, perhaps a greater inconvenience would be a pedestrian lying dead or dying in the street. I am fed up with the independent traffic reports that always state, that there is spare capacity or traffic will not be impacted, of course traffic flows will be impacted with service and tourist vehicles, perhaps coaches, I doubt if anyone will be seen toddling down to the supermarket with a shopping bag to supply the kitchens of these developments.
This application should be refused along with the application next to Leura fire station, there also should be a moratorium on all applications of this nature until proper state and federal reviews can be carried out. I have always told my children if you do not know what to do, ask for help.

This DA will create significant new traffic congestion in Leura Mall, particularly right turning traffic arriving from Sydney seeking access to the carpark. (There is already regular congestion here with reverse angle parking on the eastern side and with vehicles travelling north delaying outbound traffic with right turns into The Spires complex (complicated by the pedestrian crossing from the eastern footpath to Leura station entrance... and lack of a footpath from The Spires entrance into Leura village because of the narrow railway bridge). The bus stop on the western side of Leura mall, north of the railway is regularly used by track work buses and local services. When a bus is stopped for an extended time, traffic regularly overtakes "wrong side" of the road to get past pairs of coaches. Current traffic congestion of turning/halted-for-pedestrians/buses blocking northbound lanes will be considerably worsened.

The development itself is not in keeping with council's planning in the area which has been medium density units along the highway with restaurants along the east and west of Leura Mall north of the railway. After Flemish Flavours changed hands to The Bunker, outdoor music became a significant annoyance to residents as the hilltop location broadcast music well beyond the grounds of the restaurant into quiet residential areas. What strategies will be in place to ensure that residents will not be disturbed by broadcast noise from the new/existing facilities in the development?

Particularly for the foreseeable traffic congestion (due to already inadequate footpath and management of turning/stopped traffic in Leura Mall, I request that you do not approve this application.

YES - Let's develop tourist accommodation and facilities around Leura. But do it right and preserve this unique village set in the quiet of a National Park. There is land available to the north and still within strolling distance of the village.

HIGH DENSITY - The proposed Hillcrest Hotel is a glass, glitzy building, with high-density accommodation on a small footprint of land right within the CBD precinct of a turn of the century village. That's all wrong.

TRAFFIC - Current traffic congestion in Leura Mall will be exacerbated by the hotel's driveway feeding more cars onto an already busy two-lane street.

NOISE - To date the operators of the Bunker Cafe have created a serious noise problem for nearby businesses and residents The Bunker holds outdoor functions with loud rock music which directly impacts residents and overnight guests in The Spires apartments across the road. This loud music also reaches home owners in upper Grose Street and part of Railway Parade. (The Covid crisis halted it for a while, but the loud music will soon be back.)

THE NOISY NEW KID - It's hard to believe that one 'new kid' business on the block was allowed to disturb the operation of several established businesses that have quietly operated here for decades. Businesses negatively impacted by the noise include The Spires Serviced Apartments, The Tamarin Restaurant, Silks Restaurant (now relocated), and a potential eatery in the old 'Goblet' premises.

The Hillcrest development will supply accommodation for conferences, weddings and other social gatherings, and the attached Bunker restaurant is to be their venue for indoor and outdoor dining. This means the loud music will likely play through the afternoons as well as the evenings. That's so very wrong for our village.

PLEASE - I implore the BMCC to preserve the unique character of the Leura Village central precinct. Tourists come here because it is old and charming, and not loud and glitzy like most other places they could choose to go. They'll stop coming when Leura Village ceases to be what it has managed to remain, a rare and beautiful reminder of Australia's past.

I support new business ventures, facilities and progress, but lets be clever about it and ensure it fits within the context of area. Leura is highly valued for its village setting, heritage buildings and gardens set in a world heritage national park. We need to protect these qualities as they are unique / rare (and becoming more so each year).

Council has produced / commissioned numerous documents that describe these qualities and engaged the community on these issues. The community strongly support of these values. This data is documented in the LEP, DCP and numerous heritage studies, etc. The proposed development is inconsistent with the aims and planning guidelines in these documents. It would be very disappointing if this proposal was approved.

By all means develop more tourist accommodation around Leura, but make it real mountain, Australian accommodation. Now THAT would enhance the tourist experience, and be in harmony with our lovely old Blue Mountains villages. Australia doesn't have that many old villages. We can't afford to make a mess of them. This glitzy hotel is all wrong for Leura. Come on BMCC! Get creative and put yourselves on the map.

Please reconsider approval of this D.A.
This section of Leura is busy and gets very congested with traffic. There is precious little parking for the station carpark in 'normal times', with a hotel there as well it will become a nightmare - because it is already difficult to park there additional visitors with their cars will make station access for people with mobility issues and people with prams even more fraught.
The building is old and attractive, any replacement needs to be in keeping with the Village atmosphere which is part of the reason visitors come.

Leura should not be changed. Trees are in danger/ will be taken for this build...this would change the entrance. It is a loved place to visit as it is. Placing more people within one small Mall would put more environmental issues for the small village. Council should realise it is not a development village but should look at addressing the parking issues and volume of traffic already growing and has many times been requested by the area to answer this problem. Move on for larger development. Why does Council want to lose our heritage?

Sorry, typo in my comment above, I meant - can they please make their design more complimentary (& similar) to the heritage style that is already there (ie if this building goes ahead) ? It is also crucial for architecture to have a universal design for all (if it doesn’t already), b/c when the disabled and neurodiverse community are innately considered within every step of the planning process, it always exponentially benefits everyone. Thank you ! 🙏💛 PS Last but not least, I am also a firm believer in respecting/following the First Nations People’s lead in everything we do (as a community & nation), as they are & #AlwaysWasAlwaysWillBe the rightful owners of this land hey ! So Dharug people should have the ultimate choice, in all developments etc, that happen in Leura ...

This is a totally inappropriate development application. Too much of Leura's architectural heritage has been lost, or allowed to deteriorate. Also, the area near that section of The Mall is already a traffic bottleneck. Visitors come to see how beautiful Leura is, not to see Sydney style 'blocks' of concrete and glass. If more accommodation is deemed necessary in the Leura area, and that is doubtful, given the low occupancy of 'The Spires', restore The Ritz to its glory days as a hotel.
Please do not approve this application.

I oppose. I don’t think apartment buildings housing a lot of people should be built anywhere in the mountains let alone a congested part of Leura because the Blue Mountains are prone to bushfires. The locals need to vacate quickly apartment buildings would hinder that in my opinion.

This is a totally inappropriate Development for Leura. A three storey structure with the capacity for over 70 cars, in an area that is already a bottle-neck, particularly at the weekends and holidays, will be disastrous. The traffic from this, and The Spires, as well as the day-tourists, train pick-ups, the bus-stop, and maybe, even a few locals who brave it, will just make it impossible to move in such a narrow strip of road. Additionally, such a three storey structure is not in keeping with the 'village' nature of Leura, which is one of its key attractive elements for tourism. Leura is not a Sydney suburb, and that's one reason why people find it so appealing. That's what the tourist, wanting an escape from the city suburbs enjoy so much. I am also concerned about the building being 'incorporated' , or rather swallowed up, by the large and ugly 'addition'. As a Heritage building, it should be left as it is. Too much of Leura's architectural heritage has been lost, or allowed to deteriorate.
The addition of 3 storeys of another unimaginative generic modern Australian design, of square angular, flat roofed concrete boxes, will just give us yet one more, albeit a larger and more obtrusive, monotonous looking eyesore like the apartments on the approach ramp to Leura, or like the many new apartment buildings in places in Sydney's Harold Park.
This development will add nothing to the attractiveness of Leura. It will make it extremely difficult to get into and out of The Mall and it will detract from the lovely village ambience, a result which could actually be detrimental to the tourism on which Leura depends. Please DO NOT approve this development.

This location is the gateway to the Leura Village and as such it needs to reflect the character of the village. This development definitely does not!
I oppose this DA as I believe that it will ruin the charm of our tourist town . As far as I am aware this type of accommodation is not in high demand in Leura - where people are attracted to the heritage, quaintness, charm and uniqueness of the area - this building has none of these things. (the "adaptive reuse" of the existing heritage building is not enough to overcome the size and inappropriateness of the new structure.
As other's have mentioned - traffic is also of great concern in this location.
Please do not give the green light to this proposal - it is completely inappropriate.

Leura does not need another hotel as there is ample existing accommodation in holiday houses around village.

The style is out of character with the heritage village feel which people escape the city to enjoy the ambience and gardens.

Please strongly consider this monstrosity which would devalue properties around the village and deter visitors from visiting our unique mountain community.

This structure is large and not in keeping with the heritage look of Leura village. Please BMCC, at the least, it would be wonderful if they could make this structure considerably more in line with the other buildings on Leura Mall. I understand the need to continually develop, but the structures should not destroy the feeling of the upper mountains architecture. I have always been proud of the decisions our council makes, I’m really hoping this will be another one...

I do not agree with this development. I believe it is in a terrible place for a hotel right between a highway, a railway line and the main road into Leura. Leura Mall already suffers from heavy congestion and traffic jams at this point. The bus stop outside the railway station already makes this section of road dangerous enough due to there being a lack of road space for the buses to get of the road properly. We do not need more traffic building up through that corridor caused by an additional 73 car parking spaces, staff in the new hotel and its guests. I am also concerned that the proximity to the Alex hotel may negatively effect its business. Particularly also impede on and over shade the history of the Alex Hotel and its facade. I am also concerned with how the heritage listed building it is being attached to may suffer and loose from its heritage. From the proposed size this will be quite a large structure and will not be in keeping with Leuras quaint township. Thus disrupting the holiday garden village appeal and in the long term I believe will harm local tourism by destroying what makes Leura village unique.

If you are going to build this eyesore can you then put a petrol station in Leura Mall as well?

I oppose this DA. This DA is totally inappropriate for the town of Leura.

It would be a misuse of space that Leura simply does not have without doing damage to the township and the quality of life for its locals.

The size and structure of the proposed development is obtrusive, and would detract from the charm of the village in question. The implied increase of traffic to the area, particularly the top of Leura Mall is grossly impractical to a spot that is already a bottleneck. Furthermore, the damage to the heritage structure is not desired nor is it acceptable.

People visit and stay in Leura for its charm and its history. Destroying part of its history for a modern eyesore that will cause more traffic jams is an absolutely disgusting and impractical proposal.

110% a totally inappropriate development for the township and in particular the location.
The proposal is wrong on so many grounds and puts at risk the general ambience of the township, of which the heritage buildings play such an important role. It is exactly this ambience that draws an already and increasing large number of tourists to the township.
The "Adaptive reuse" of a heritage site is marketing spin at its finest and one which hopefully doesn't turn out to be another Willow Grove debacle as experienced by the good people of Parramatta.
Not to mention the small and narrow stretch of road over the railway line into Leura township which is already a bottleneck for the large volume of traffic exiting the highway (and the Spires complex) so a proposal which adds turning traffic into and exiting a 3 storey hotel with underground carpark is nonsense.
Here's hoping the community can unite against this appalling proposal which strikes at the heart if the very nature of the township and what draws people to it!

I strongly object to creating yet another eye sore and another white elephant at the entrance to our peaceful and beautiful village..Have we learnt nothing from the Spires experience? The people behind this proposal might have more money than business sense. Who would want to come to Leura and stay in a 3 storey concrete jungle,located between a Highway and a Railway station? This application is wrong on so many levels. And the comments above have spelled most of them out. Please do not approve!