198-204 Leura Mall Leura NSW 2780

I refer to the above planning application, I have no problem with tourism, however, my objection is traffic. Every application for the past 30 years always states either there is spare capacity or local roads will not be affected. In late 2018 traffic counts indicated that Leura received nearly 4 million vehicles annually and The Mall is now considered a black spot as it has received black spot funding. Railway Parade must also be included as a black spot. The latest traffic plan was withdrawn at the last minute and to date, nothing has been seen. Vehicles circle the Woolworths carpark like vultures hunting their prey and traffic in The Mall is frequently at a standstill. Railway Parade in late 2018 carried nearly 700 vehicles per day and I would consider that these figures stated above have increased considerably as Bunnings alone has been receiving 7,000 people per day. I can certainly take a traffic count at midnight and make the same claims. I like many others, no longer shop at Leura. Pedestrians are left to fend for themselves, playing Russian roulette with vehicles, Railway Parade does not have any footpaths, so it is necessary to walk along the roadway, which does not meet any Roads and Maritime or Austroads standards.
Whilst as I do support tourism, I cannot support this application until a traffic plan has been implemented and I believe that there should be a moratorium on all development applications until the issues of traffic have been resolved in Leura, possibly including Katoomba. The area has been overdeveloped and it is not acceptable to dump more developments in this area.
Michael MacLaurin

I totally agree with Michael MacLaurin. Last year myself and four other residents had a meeting with council staff re parking in Leura. I presented a colour coded plan of existing parking areas and the difficulties residents find to park in Leura often having to continue to Katoomba for shopping. In addition we proposed parking fees except for residents.
Council advised that a Leura Parking Plan was being prepared. That was it!
Nothing since.
No large developments within the shopping precinct of Leura should be considered until a viable solution for tourists and residents has been resolved.

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.

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.

I agree the development is wrong on many levels. Trees removed? Traffic impact! Unreasonable use of the land !

This plan looks like an overdevelopment of the site. Too many trees being removed. Too many dwellings being built and too many traffic movements in a highly congested traffic area.
When this area is highly congested and there are no parking spaces available, I have to travel further to Katoomba to shop

Removing the large old trees changes the historically leafy, dense street and yard canopied character of Leura.

I am fed up with these independent traffic reports, they would be, I assume paid for by the developer and all state either there is spare capacity or local roads will not be affected. these developers should be contributing to road upgrades and taking into account the larger picture while using traffic counts by machine. the last count was taken in November 2018 and that stated after doing the maths, 4 million vehicles pass through Leura annually.

I think the traffic "study" figures are based on very dodgy pre COVID tourism traffic projections (numbers provided by the Council) going back for years and taking into account factors such as a new airport for tourism (that may end up primarily for freight, who knows) and dealing with an historically lower level of "residential" occupancy and use than is now the case. A proper traffic study based on actual current readings over an extended period needs to be done and funded by the state government if it is state government policy to continue to give priority land use to tourism. Is there not "black spot" funding allocated already ? I think all the developers need to account for the impact of all the vehicle movements, parking and other traffic issues on the real surrounding environment as is required by the Act and Regulations and criteria establishing the scope of the studies should be developed and determined by the Council (in consultation) and given to developers as an essential part of their applications; plus they pay an independent to do it. The state government landuse and development policies for the Blue Mountains need to be properly disclosed and prioritised. The local Council must be given power to deal with these and consult with residents and organised interest groups in the local government area so that there is the reintroduction of a mechanism for meaningful consultation at a minimum.