Minarah College

Opening a new campus at Minarah College is essential to accommodate the growing student population and to provide state-of-the-art facilities that enhance students' learning experiences. The new campus will allow for smaller class sizes, fostering a more personalised and effective educational environment. Additionally, it will enable the college to expand its curriculum offerings, including advanced technology and extracurricular programs, which are crucial for preparing students for future challenges. By investing in a new campus, Minarah College can continue to uphold its commitment to excellence in education and community engagement, ensuring that every student has access to the resources they need to succeed.

Submission in Support of Minarah College – A Vital Step Towards Camden’s Future

Dear Members of the Department of Planning, Camden City Council and Camden community,

The proposal for Minarah College represents not just the development of a school, but an opportunity for Camden to embrace diversity and inclusivity while addressing the growing educational needs of the region. Camden and Catherine Fields are at a pivotal point of transformation, and this school offers the community a chance to welcome progress and prepare for the future.

As part of the South West Growth Area, Camden is experiencing rapid development driven by infrastructure projects such as the Western Sydney International Airport and major transport upgrades. This expansion requires more schools and services, not just for the existing population but also for the many families who will soon call this area home.

Minarah College is much more than a school for minority communities. It will serve as a bridge between cultures, fostering a sense of belonging, inclusivity, and mutual respect. In a diverse society like Australia, providing educational spaces that embrace cultural values alongside academic excellence is critical. This school will allow students to grow, excel, and contribute positively to society, equipped with the skills and values necessary to thrive in the modern world.

The argument that this school will disrupt the peaceful rural nature of Catherine Fields overlooks the future reality of the area. With the growth of new housing estates and infrastructure projects, Catherine Fields will soon become a thriving community hub. Minarah College will bring much-needed education services to this rapidly growing area. Its presence will attract families and businesses, contributing to local economic growth and enhancing the community’s social fabric.

To reject this proposal based on fears or misunderstandings would be a step backward, undermining the values of openness and diversity that have always defined Australia. Instead, by supporting this project, Camden can lead by example, showing how growth and inclusivity can go hand in hand. Together, we can build a future that benefits all residents, regardless of background, while maintaining the strong rural identity that has long characterised Catherine Fields.

In conclusion, Minarah College is not only an investment in the future of our children but also an investment in the future of Camden itself. Supporting this project means embracing progress, diversity, and shared prosperity for all. Let’s not miss this opportunity to make a positive, lasting impact on our community.

Thank you for your consideration.

See Attachment - Based on the content on this side, I have put list of answers to most common objections/fears.

Warm regards,
Mohammed Yasin
Member of MLNSW, Ex-President.

I am supporting the project as it will provide additional opportunity for the students and community with their education . It will create new job opportunity and build a more tolerant society

This is a fantastic project catering to the growing educational needs of our community.

We will greatly benefit from this college especially for those residing in its vicinity.

I hope this project will commence asap and produce a multitude of vibrant young Australians

The College is supporting the education of the future generations through a holistic approach.

I believe Minarah campus would be great for the community, I have sent my children to the Green Valley campus. The school holds a high value of teaching and encompasses diversity into the community.
I fully support the establishment of this school in Catherine Fields .

I write this submission in support of Minarah college school project in Camden vicinity. As an Australian and Muslim, I am proud of the vast ethnicities this country is built on. I am a local resident of Denham Court area and have been living here for years now. There are Anglican, Catholic and other religious schools in the area that cater for a vast community. This project if approved will be of great educational benefit for our younger generation that will contribute to this great country and our communities. Minarah college is not only about Islamic fundamentals but rather for all faiths and backgrounds. I currently and many others have young children who will benefit from this school as its local and minutes away. This will contribute greatly to our future kids. Minarah college has a great academic background and I truly hope this project goes ahead. Thank you

Minarah College is one of top school in Liverpool for Naplan. By having a campus in Catherine fields, it will help provide opportunities for students to learn from the one of the best. Although currently a rural classification CF area is growing and population growth is expanding at a rapid pace. By allowing Minarah College Catherine Field project the NSW State Government will assist with betterment of Australian citizens as they will have an opportunity to go to the school which will be open to all.

Living in the local area, I support this project due to the lack of affordable private education for my children. Having to currently drive 20-25 minutes for school each way, it puts alot of strain on our as well as many others work/life balance and this opportunity would help alleviate that load not just for myself but for many other families that are local to these areas. I support this project because it's our right to have a good school that services the denham court/emerald hills/Catherine fields areas as we have a demand for high schools in this district. The current 2 high schools in our vicinity have very long waiting lists that you have to apply for with entry tests where many children don't make it forcing us to drive out of the area for schools. A newly built Minarah College would open opportunities for many families in the catchment area with state of the art facilities and properly structured to not cause interferences.

I live in Catherine Field and I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposal for Minarah College to be built in Catherine Field.

The entire road network in Catherine Field is simply not equipped to handle the significant increase in traffic that a school of this size will generate. The roads are already in poor condition, with soft edges that deteriorate during rain. These roads are often patched temporarily, only for the rain to wash them away again, leaving the same issues unresolved. This cycle of temporary fixes is not sustainable, and recent rain has caused damage to my car while driving on Catherine Field Road, further highlighting the fragility of the local infrastructure.

One of my biggest concerns is that the proposed school would only have a single point of entry and exit. As someone who attends a growing school in Edmondson Park, which currently has 1,500 students and continues to expand, I can speak from experience about the traffic challenges schools face. Despite having four separate entry and exit points for cars, including a dedicated bus bay and a large "kiss and drop" zone, we still encounter significant traffic congestion. Our roads are fully developed with curbs, gutters, and footpaths, yet we regularly require council rangers and police to manage complaints from local residents about blocked roads and driveways. The proposed "kiss and drop" zone for Minarah College accommodates only a minimal amount of cars, which is insufficient. Where will the other cars line up? It’s hard to imagine them not backing up along Catherine Field Road, creating further traffic bottlenecks and safety concerns. In comparison, my school’s kiss and drop zone holds double that amount, yet we still face ongoing issues.

Additionally, the proposed number of parking spaces within the school grounds will not adequately cater to the staff or visitors. For special events, a school of this size will draw hundreds of cars—where will they park? The idea that they might park along Catherine Field Road is concerning, as this would exacerbate traffic congestion and create unsafe conditions for both pedestrians and drivers. Furthermore, the school plans to hire out its sporting fields on weekends. As a person who plays sports, I know firsthand how difficult it is to find parking at busy sporting venues. Even at large fields with ample parking, we often have to arrive early just to secure a spot. With limited parking available at the school, this will likely result in further strain on local roads during weekend sporting events.

The opening of roads from Oran Park to Springfield Road, combined with the closure of access from Camden Valley Way down Deepfields Road, has already increased traffic on Catherine Field Road significantly. As it stands, the road is struggling to cope with the existing traffic load. Adding a school of this size would overwhelm the road network and create dangerous conditions for all involved. The infrastructure simply isn’t ready to support this level of development.

For these reasons, I strongly urge the relevant authorities to reconsider the proposal for Minarah College and determine that Catherine Field Road is not an appropriate location for a school of this scale. The safety of the community and the well-being of local residents must come first, and the current infrastructure cannot support this project responsibly.

I strongly object to this project. Please see below two major reasons why this project should not go ahead.
I would also like to note the roads cannot currently cope when it rains without the introduction of a project of this size. Has any survey work been done on these roads when it rains? If so I cannot fathom how this project could possibly go ahead.

Water Servicing and Wastewater
The proposed development is situated within the Leppington Water Supply Zone (WSZ), which currently has limited capacity to support significant growth. This poses a challenge for developments of this scale, as the water supply infrastructure may not be sufficient to accommodate the needs of a new school with 980 students. The development also falls within the Lowes Creek catchment, where the existing wastewater network has no capacity to service additional developments at this time. This lack of wastewater infrastructure presents a serious obstacle, as the project cannot proceed without a reliable and adequate wastewater management solution.

On 1 September 2023, Sydney Water conducted a preliminary hydraulic modeling assessment, which indicated that the drinking water system had some capacity to support the proposed school. However, this assessment was made over a year ago, and there is uncertainty about whether the capacity remains sufficient today. Given the region's ongoing growth and development, it is essential to reassess the water infrastructure's current state to determine whether it can still meet the needs of the proposed school and its population. If the water capacity has diminished due to other developments or increased demand, it may not be possible to supply the school with adequate drinking water without further upgrades to the water network.

In addition, the sewer treatment plant indicated on the staging plan is still "to be confirmed" (TBC) and is only planned for stages 1 and 2 of the development. There is no clear indication of how wastewater management will be handled in subsequent stages, and the plans for an onsite wastewater management system and sewerage system are vague and incomplete. The absence of a comprehensive and phased wastewater management strategy raises concerns about the long-term feasibility of the project. Without a detailed plan, the development risks overloading the already limited wastewater infrastructure, potentially causing environmental harm and health hazards for both the school and surrounding areas.

Stormwater
The proposed stormwater management for the development is also problematic, particularly regarding the Onsite Detention (OSD) system and its connection to Catherine Field Road. The current design does not provide a safe exit for stormwater from the school site, which could lead to dangerous conditions during heavy rainfall. The majority of the proposed road upgrades along Catherine Field Road include only a kerb, without a proper channel or gutter to direct stormwater flow. This is a major oversight, as the lack of adequate stormwater infrastructure means that water could overflow onto the road, creating hazards for both pedestrians and drivers. Uncontrolled stormwater flow could lead to flooding, erosion, and significant safety risks, especially during severe weather events.

By failing to properly address stormwater drainage and road upgrades, the project introduces potential hazards that could affect not only the school but also the surrounding community. Stormwater runoff needs to be carefully managed to prevent damage to public infrastructure and ensure the safety of road users. Without significant improvements to the stormwater management system and road design, the development could create long-term drainage problems that would be costly and difficult to rectify.

Until the local Council or State Government undertakes comprehensive strategic planning and infrastructure upgrades for the region, a development of this scale should not be approved. The current infrastructure is insufficient to meet the demands of the proposed project, and the lack of water, wastewater, and stormwater capacity presents serious risks. The flow-on effects for the local community, such as increased water shortages, environmental degradation, and safety hazards, would be significant. Therefore, proceeding with the development in its current form is not in the public interest.

This project will increase visibility of the suburb and attract more people to visit the area. The school would add value to our residents and we would have great access to good education in the area. I highly support and wish success for this project.

I strongly object to this project and below outline two major concerns I have:
Traffic & Parking: Although the development's capacity has been reduced, the traffic impacts stemming from the proposed school have not been adequately addressed beyond the original proposal. The current plan suggests minimal road works, limited only to the frontage of the property, with no mention of further upgrades to surrounding roads or intersections that will inevitably experience increased traffic due to the school’s operation. Notably, the proposed upgrades are not scheduled to occur until stage 3 of the development, which raises concerns about whether existing infrastructure will be able to cope with the anticipated traffic during the earlier stages. The "kiss and drop" zone planned for stage 1, and its expansion in stage 2, may serve as a convenient option for some parents, but it is unlikely to accommodate the traffic demand entirely. Many parents and children prefer not to use this arrangement, opting instead to park and walk their children to the school entrance. Given the limited parking available within the school grounds, this could result in parents parking along nearby streets, exacerbating congestion and creating potential safety hazards for pedestrians and other road users.

Moreover, the pedestrian crossing located within the "kiss and drop" zone presents an additional challenge. This arrangement is likely to disrupt the flow of traffic, as cars will need to stop for pedestrians, causing backups and reducing the overall functionality of the zone. Without proper planning and sufficient parking facilities, the school’s traffic flow could become chaotic, particularly during peak drop-off and pick-up times. This could lead to frustration among parents, delays in traffic, and potential safety issues for both drivers and pedestrians. The lack of comprehensive traffic studies, and the absence of road improvements beyond the property frontage, leave a significant gap in ensuring the area’s infrastructure can handle the increased volume of vehicles the school will generate.

Wastewater: The proposed plans for wastewater management also appear insufficient, especially given the school’s expected population of 980 students. The designated wastewater area does not seem to be large enough to handle the volume of effluent that will be produced by such a large development. Furthermore, the placement of the Effluent Management Area (EMA) near the sports fields introduces another significant problem. The wastewater system, which will disperse treated effluent into the ground in this area, risks causing waterlogging on the fields. This would make the fields unusable for extended periods, particularly after rain, as noted in the report. However, even without additional rainfall, the constant dispersal of effluent to the EMA could lead to persistently soggy conditions, rendering the fields unusable for much of the year. This not only limits the school's recreational and sports activities but also raises concerns about the safety and hygiene of the area.

Moreover, while the wastewater report references an effluent treatment plant, there is no clear indication on the plans as to where this critical infrastructure will be located. The absence of this information raises questions about how the school intends to manage wastewater treatment on-site effectively. Without a designated and clearly planned location for the treatment plant, it is difficult to assess the feasibility of the wastewater management system and whether it can adequately support the school’s population. The potential for waterlogging, combined with the lack of clarity around the treatment plant’s placement, suggests that the current wastewater management strategy is underdeveloped and may not be capable of handling the long-term demands of the site.

Development of this scale and impact should not be accepted or approved until comprehensive strategic planning and infrastructure delivery for the region are completed by the local Council or State Government. The ripple effects on the local community will be substantial, making the project contrary to the public interest.

There are many aspects of this project I object to but in this submission I am going to concentrate on one main area of concern and that is 'flooding'.
The flood assessment presented in Appendix P, specifically in the Overland Flow Assessment & Flood Emergency Response Plan (FERP), has significant gaps in its evaluation of the site’s flood risks. One of the most critical issues is the exclusion of flood mapping for water depths below 50mm. While this may seem like a minor omission, it is a substantial oversight, particularly when considering that the flood hazard curve indicates that water flows of 2 meters per second (m/s) are categorized as hazard level H5, regardless of the depth of the water. This means that even relatively shallow waters moving at high velocities can still pose significant risks. By not accounting for floodwaters below 50mm, the assessment fails to fully capture the scope of potential hazards, especially in areas where fast-moving but shallow overland flow can occur.

Further information is required to assess the full extent of the impacts, especially along the southern boundary of the site, where the majority of overland flow impacts are likely to take place. This area is particularly vulnerable, as the topography and hydrology suggest it will bear the brunt of the water flow during flood events. Without a detailed analysis of this section of the site, including more comprehensive mapping that accounts for all floodwater depths and velocities, it is impossible to fully understand how the overland flow will behave in various flood scenarios. This leaves a significant gap in the risk assessment, which could have serious implications for flood management, emergency planning, and safety protocols.

The flood mapping that has been conducted does show ponding of water within the site during both the 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) and Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) events. Ponding occurs when water accumulates in low-lying areas and does not flow away, posing significant risks, particularly in developed or semi-developed areas like the proposed site. This issue is critical and should not be deferred for future consideration, as it represents an unresolved risk. Ponding can lead to long-term standing water, which may affect both the structural integrity of the development and the safety of its users, particularly students and staff. The Department would need to have a comprehensive understanding of these risks before it can make an informed assessment of the site's safety and viability. In the absence of this information, the current flood risk to students and other occupants during a flood event remains unclear and unresolved.

During both PMF and 1% AEP flood events, overland floodwaters are projected to flow onto Catherine Fields Road, a key access point for the site. According to the flood hazard assessment, this area could be affected up to hazard category H5, which represents a very dangerous flood condition. In H5 conditions, fast-flowing water poses significant threats to safety, particularly for vehicles and pedestrians. The proposed stormwater management system, including the swale, appears to funnel all of the site's surface water and discharge it directly onto Catherine Fields Road. This is a concerning design flaw, as it increases the flood risk not just on the site itself, but also on the adjacent public infrastructure. Roads are essential for evacuation and emergency response during flood events, and if the road becomes inundated to H5 hazard levels, it may no longer be passable. This could trap people on the site and hinder rescue operations, further increasing the overall flood risk.

Moreover, Appendix P does not adequately address the conditions on the site during a PMF event, even though this is the flood event with the greatest potential to cause catastrophic impacts. PMF events are extreme and rare, but they represent the worst-case flood scenario that any flood emergency planning should consider. The absence of a thorough analysis of PMF conditions is a significant shortfall in the assessment. While PMF events are low probability, their high-impact nature requires careful planning, particularly for developments like schools, where the safety of large numbers of people is at stake. The lack of detailed discussion regarding PMF scenarios leaves critical questions unanswered, particularly about how the site would perform under such extreme conditions. For example, would the proposed development be resilient to the immense water flows and velocities associated with a PMF event? Would the building design, infrastructure, and evacuation routes be able to handle such an event without putting lives at risk?

The images provided in the assessment do indicate significant flood risks along the southern boundary of the site, with hazard levels ranging from H5 to H6. Hazard level H6 is even more dangerous than H5, representing life-threatening conditions where even trained individuals would have difficulty surviving in the water. The presence of H5-H6 hazard levels in this area should prompt immediate concern and further investigation, particularly regarding how this risk can be mitigated through better flood management and infrastructure design. It raises serious questions about whether the proposed development is suitable for this site, given the high level of risk posed by flooding along its southern boundary.

In conclusion, Appendix P falls short of providing a comprehensive assessment of the flood risks associated with the proposed development. By excluding shallow water depths and failing to fully analyze PMF conditions, the assessment leaves significant gaps in understanding the true flood hazards. These omissions, coupled with unresolved issues related to water ponding and overland flow onto Catherine Fields Road, suggest that the current flood risk to the site has not been adequately addressed. As such, more detailed analysis and mitigation planning are required before any informed decisions can be made about the development's safety and feasibility.

The proposed school development does not align with the established objectives of the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone. This zoning is specifically designed to support activities that contribute to the long-term viability of primary production, ensuring that land is utilized in a way that supports agricultural and other rural activities essential for local economies. The key objectives of the RU4 Primary Production zoning include:

Enabling sustainable primary industry and other compatible uses: The RU4 zoning is tailored to prioritize sustainable primary industries, particularly agricultural enterprises that rely on smaller lots for intensive forms of production. This sustainability aspect not only focuses on environmental preservation but also on ensuring that agricultural businesses can thrive over the long term. By allowing activities that are compatible with primary production, the zoning seeks to ensure that rural land remains dedicated to food production, resource cultivation, and other essential rural industries.

Encouraging diversity and employment opportunities in relation to primary industry enterprises: Another critical objective of the RU4 zoning is to foster employment opportunities within the realm of primary industries. This includes promoting enterprises that are smaller in scale but require a more intensive level of production. These enterprises might include niche agricultural ventures such as organic farming, specialty crops, or intensive horticulture, which can generate significant employment in rural areas. By encouraging a variety of agricultural activities, the zone is designed to support a diverse and resilient local economy that can offer jobs to the rural population.

Minimizing conflicts between land uses within the zone and adjacent zones: A significant concern in land-use planning is the potential for conflicts between different types of land uses. The RU4 zone aims to minimize these conflicts by ensuring that the activities permitted within the zone are compatible with one another and with neighboring zones. For example, allowing residential or industrial developments in a primarily agricultural area could lead to issues such as noise complaints, odor concerns, or water resource disputes. By restricting incompatible uses, the zoning aims to maintain a balance where primary industries can operate without interference, while neighboring land uses can coexist peacefully.

The proposed school development, however, appears to be at odds with these objectives. Firstly, it does not contribute to the sustainability of primary industries. Schools, by their nature, are not part of the agricultural or rural economy and do not directly support the land's primary purpose of food production or resource management. In fact, the construction of a school on land designated for primary production could potentially limit the availability of land for agricultural enterprises, particularly for those that require smaller lots for intensive production. The presence of a school might also introduce infrastructural needs—such as roads, utilities, and parking—that are not compatible with the long-term sustainability of agricultural uses.

Secondly, the proposed development does not foster employment opportunities related to primary industry enterprises. While a school does provide employment opportunities, these jobs are in the education sector, not in the realm of primary production. This runs counter to the zoning's objective of encouraging diverse employment within the agricultural sector. The introduction of a non-agricultural enterprise like a school could divert focus from the goal of supporting small-scale, intensive primary industries that are better suited to the RU4 zoning.

Furthermore, the presence of a school in a rural, agricultural area could increase the likelihood of land-use conflicts. Schools require certain infrastructure and services—such as traffic management, safety considerations, and public amenities—that are not typical in areas designated for primary production. These needs might conflict with the day-to-day operations of primary industries, which could involve the use of machinery, the transportation of goods, or the presence of livestock. The school could introduce concerns about noise, safety, or air quality, especially if agricultural activities such as spraying pesticides or operating heavy machinery are carried out nearby. This could lead to complaints or even restrictions on the types of agricultural activities allowed in the area, further diminishing the potential for primary production in the zone.

Additionally, the development of a school in this zone could create a precedent for other non-agricultural uses, which could gradually erode the integrity of the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zoning. Once one non-agricultural use is allowed, it becomes easier for other similar developments to be approved, leading to a domino effect that might eventually undermine the original intent of the zoning. This could result in a reduction of agricultural land, threatening the diversity of primary industries and the rural employment opportunities that the zoning seeks to promote.

In conclusion, the proposed school development is incompatible with the objectives of the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone. It neither contributes to the sustainability of primary industries nor promotes employment within the agricultural sector. Furthermore, it introduces the potential for land-use conflicts and could set a precedent for further erosion of the zoning's purpose. Allowing the school development to proceed would contradict the core principles of the RU4 zoning and undermine the long-term viability of the rural economy in the area. Therefore, it is clear that this proposal does not align with the goals of the RU4 Primary Production Small Lots zone and should be reconsidered.

To Whom it May Concern:

I am writing to formally object to the establishment of Minarah College, and Community precinct proposed just two doors down from my residence.

The planned operating hours of 7 AM to 10 PM raise significant concerns, particularly regarding traffic and parking in our area. Catherine Fields Road does not have the capacity to accommodate the volume of vehicles a school of this size would generate. Nor do we have the infrastructure ie. the fact that the proposed children's sports field is situated over the sewer line. There are various reports that a contradictory ie. proposed staff and sewer objectives.

Thank you for considering my concerns.

Sincerely,
Rebecca McDonald

I strongly believe that the community of the Catherine fields area and surrounds will truly benefit from this school opening.
The Minarah College campus in Green Valley has a distinguished reputation and will strive to carry that same reputation if not better, across to this new and improved campus.
The children of Minarah need this campus to better their learning experience and give them opportunities not available to them at the current campus.
I stand by the proposal and strongly support the opening of this new campus.

I support the college in opening a new campus as it will assist in the growth of education in the local area and the growth of the college.

New campus is needed for the growth of the school.

It is a valuable project as the current school students number is increasing and this school is in high demand in terms of excellent education and well being of students.
The community as a whole will benefit without any hindrance to anything or anyone. It’s a very good place to build the school.