Mingara Recreation Club Seniors Housing, Tumbi Umbi

1) I object to the scale of the current proposal. I do not object to a retirement village on this site.
2) The EIS is inadequate in a dozen matters, some severely so, that I set out in the attached comments.

As a member of the athletics club, I cannot see how this development can proceed as proposed.

The mingara club has always been a busy place, especially on Friday nights (which coincidences with Little As events). There have also been significant additional developments to the club, further exacerbating strain on parking arrangements. This development would remove the majority, if not all of the parking area which the athletics club currently utilises. Without additional parking, I cannot see how mingara club would maintain adequate space for its own patrons.

The athletics club original consent does call for at least 150 spaces to be made available. If the proposed project cannot allow the footprint for this, then perhaps a multi level car park should be considered as a part of the development.

The athletics club has great facilities and is a very important part of the community for recreation and the health of those who live here. The proposed developments/lack of parking would not only deter people from using it, but it would also make holding larger events (both athletics and entertainment such as carols etc) nearly impossible.

It could also cause massive disruption to the streets and residents surrounding Mingara, stretching across the main road, which also brings with it huge safety concerns for pedestrians, which would not exist if adequate parking remains/is catered for.

Unless these real concerns are addressed, I will continue to object to the project and will be making representations to local members.

As the organisation responsible for the development of the sport of athletics in NSW we have a number of concerns relating to this development and its impact on the local centre and athletics in the region. Please see the attached letter.

There are already significant traffic issues daily in the streets surrounding the proposed development, i would like to know what will be put inplace to resolve the expected increase in traffic and noise for the construction and for the development once established, when will discussions take place with the community for this. What planning has been done and when will the adjustments/solutions to resolve the traffic increases will be put inplace and to what level of input i will have as a rersisent of the area

thank you

Objection to Mingara Recreation Club Senior Housing
SSD-63475709


A regional community synthetic track is north of this proposed development. The proposed plans show separation of these by a grassed corridor owned by Mingara. The whole of the proposed development will occupy land that has been used as the track facilities traditional car park for the past 24 years. As the host club of the Mingara Regional Athletics Centre, we object to the proposed senior housing development, as it stands, due to the loss of proximity parking to the facility.

There is an existing council condition of consent that requires the provision of 300 car parking spaces for our community facility granted in DA 420/98. This is composed of 150 all weather spaces near the track and an additional 150 car parking spaces to be provided as grassed overflow parking. Another condition of consent also requires set down areas, provision for buses, bicycles, and pedestrians.

Nowhere in the thousand pages of the 50 reports detailing the development, do I read a fair representation of the track facility’s usage by the regional community. Approx 50-60,000 athletes race or train there over the year, with visitors at least double that figure.
Around 80 regional schools use it for their athletics carnivals. There are also 20 highly qualified coaches training adults from 5 regional athletic clubs. Since its opening in 2000, this community athletic facility has helped develop 11 Olympic or Commonwealth Games athletes, and 120 Australian representatives in track, field, and race walking events. Over 2100 athletes have also won NSW or Australian Championship medals. In addition, we have had two athletes with disabilities represent Australia at the Paralympics, and World Championships.

Every year, over 300 cars are parked at the track on at least 6 days for certain carnivals, on 15-18 Friday nights 250 car spaces are required for Little As, and the 80 schools use between 60-250 spaces during the daytime. During the evening there are usually 60-80 car spaces used by adults 4-7pm as it is an important training venue all year round on 3 nights a week plus Saturday morning 8-12. Soccer and Oztag also use the inside grass field for training in the evening and competition games on Saturday during their season. This regional community facility also supports the annual Cancer Council ‘Relay for Life’ and the annual Christmas Carols with fireworks; each maxing out the parking area.

Proximity parking to the venue is an important convenience appreciated by many, especially young families; some with prams and small children, but also grandparents; some with mobility issues. The adult athletes often have equipment that needs to be brought in/out for their training. Parking close at hand is also a safety issue for our female athletes; especially with half the year in darkness at evening training.

Is there an alternative parking area near the athletic facility ? No.
There is nothing NEAR the entrance to the facility. The main Mingara parking lot begins 300m away, but realistically, athletes or their supporters may have to settle for a vacant parking space 400 or even 500m away during big events. The grass referred to in a 1998 plan behind the Mingara main building has now been developed. Additions include construction of Mingara Drive going thru to Wyong Road with accompanying flood drainage ditch, the Bowling Green carpark, and the recent Mingara DA application for an Early Learning Centre. Whatever grass remains is spread out and boggy.



We are fighting to keep our traditional grassed car parking right at the main entrance to the facility. We believe that the Council consent conditions in DA 420/98 are binding, if not in a law court, then certainly in the court of public opinion.

However, we also understand the need for future senior housing on the Central Coast, and believe that a compromise is possible.

If the proposed Lot 1 of the development were to set back its northern most boundary from the southern most boundary of Lot 71 (the athletic facility) with a wider 30m grass corridor between them, owned by Mingara, then it would be enough for 150 grassed parking places. We would then accept that the 150 sealed parking places were catered for in the main parking area. This would fulfil the DA 420/98 consent conditions. If the current roundabout at the track entry was left unaltered, there would also be room for the buses, disability access, set downs, Ambulance, Academy of Sport parking etc. The developers may lose 1 or 2 villa units when rotating Building 1 to comply with the new boundary setback.


The Mingara Regional Athletics Club would be happy to consult further with the developers to enable a compromise resolution that will still maintain the envied reputation of the Regional Athletics Centre and still give convenient access for community usage.

Regards, Robert Beardslee
Life Member,
Mingara Regional Athletics Club, Inc.

I am writing to formally object to the proposed redevelopment of the car park adjacent to Mingara Recreation Centre, as detailed in the State Significant Development application for the retirement village at 14 Mingara Drive, Tumbi Umbi, NSW. While I appreciate the need for senior living facilities, I am deeply concerned about the detrimental impact this redevelopment will have on the sports community, particularly those who rely on this space for athletics.
The Mingara Recreation Centre serves as a vital hub for athletic and sports activities in the region. The car park in question provides critical access to these facilities for participants, spectators, and volunteers. Removing or repurposing this essential infrastructure will lead to significant challenges, including:
1. Reduced Accessibility: Many athletes, especially young participants and those with disabilities, rely on the availability of nearby parking to access the Centre. A reduction in parking spaces will disproportionately impact these groups, potentially discouraging their involvement in sports. In a large community where options and access can be limited we want to encourage young people and families to utilize this resource, not discourage them.
2. Increased Traffic and Safety Concerns: With fewer parking spaces, users will be forced to park in surrounding streets, creating congestion and increasing safety risks for pedestrians, particularly children.
3. Negative Impact on Local Athletics Events and other sporting options: The Centre frequently hosts regional athletics meets, training sessions, and community sports programs. Limited parking capacity could lead to a decline in attendance at these events, reducing their viability and diminishing the community's engagement in sports.
4. Undermining Community Health and Wellbeing:
Athletics and sports play a crucial role in promoting physical and mental health. By restricting access to these facilities, the proposed development risks undermining these benefits for the local community.
5. Falling behind NSW.
The central coast already lacks adequate state or national level sporting facilities. When compared to regions like Maitland, Newcastle, Blacktown, Wollongong, Dubbo and Wagga Wagga, our options are already substandard. Removing the parking option from Mingara will not only diminish the value of the facility to regional and state athletics organisations, it will also have a significant impact on sports tourism, effectively removing the facility from consideration for major events.
Additionally, at current there are at least three other additional, significant projects in planning to address the increasing demand for senior living accommodations in the Central Coast area. This additional effort seems only to seek to drive value for Mingara Leisure Group, rather than the community it claims to serve.
1. Uniting Nareen Gardens Village, Bateau Bay: The Uniting Church has received approval for a redevelopment project comprising 180 new retirement and independent living apartments, along with a 160-place residential aged care home.
2. Oasis Caratel Caravan Park, Kanwal: Plans have been submitted to transform this site into a development featuring over 675 apartments, including 15% allocated for affordable housing and 30% designated as independent living units for seniors.
3. Diggers @The Entrance, Long Jetty: A development application has been lodged for the construction of 89 seniors living apartments in two buildings, ranging from two to five storeys.
While I support thoughtful development that benefits all stakeholders, I urge you to reconsider the current proposal in light of its far-reaching impact on the sports community. I strongly recommend that alternative solutions be explored, and recommend that longer term considerations are made about how to future proof the central coast for both young and old community members.
Thank you for considering this objection. I trust that the voices of the community will be heard and that a balanced outcome can be achieved.

Our family strongly objects to the current proposal to redevelop the land adjacent to Mingara Regional Athletics Centre, the Central Coast's only competition-grade athletics facility. The land, which is the only parking available for not only for regular users of the track, athletics and soccer organisations, but thousands of families across the Coast throughout the school year given the majority of primary and secondary schools host carnivals and sports days at the facility.
As a family, we pay an additional fee to visit the track weekly, and parking has been a challenge for years. Removing what limited parking is there only adds greater burden to Central Coast families - adding to the well-documented Wyong Road / Tumbi Road traffic bottlenecks, and further spreading the footprint of ugly, high density development in the area. Its removal is likely to also increase traffic and personal safety incidents, with young people and families looking to access the track forced to park in the parking lot of the Mingara Club, which is already congested at peak times, and needing to walk to and from the athletics facility in the dark.
I would remind you that the Regional Athletics Centre was jointly funded by Central Coast Athletics, the NSW Government, Central Coast Council AND Mingara Club. It is unfair to remove or even reduce access to an important local resource from Central Coast families and rate payers - who are required to pay an additional fee each time they access the track - for the sole financial benefit of Mingara Club.

Here’s a revised version of your letter with varied phrasing and additional points to strengthen the argument:

[Your Name]


Re: Concerns Regarding the Proposed Aged Care Facility Near the Athletics Track

I am writing to express my concerns about the proposed aged care facility and its potential negative impact on the Mingara precinct, particularly the athletics track. While I appreciate the need for aged care developments, the current proposal raises significant issues that I believe need further consideration.

The athletics track is one of the most widely utilized sports facilities on the Central Coast, being the only synthetic track in the area and home to aspiring and current international athletes. Its availability is critical for community use, including school athletics carnivals, regular training sessions, and football matches. The extreme proximity of the proposed facility jeopardizes the track’s accessibility, functionality, and future use.
1. Parking and Accessibility:
• The reduction of nearby parking will pose significant challenges for families, elderly spectators, and people with disabilities. Currently, the gravel car park serves as essential overflow parking during major events such as weddings, school formals, sporting awards, and school carnivals. For these events, close access is crucial to accommodate attendees with mobility challenges or those with small children in prams. Without this parking area, visitors will face a 500-meter walk, including crossing roads, to reach the track.
• The displacement of parking will also disrupt regular athletic training, football practices, and matches, which occur multiple days a week. Increased distance and difficulty accessing the facilities could deter participation and attendance.
2. Noise and Activity Levels:
• The athletics track and adjacent fields are frequently bustling with activity, creating a lively and sometimes noisy environment. This could prove distressing for aged care residents living in such close proximity. For the wellbeing of both athletes and future residents, it is crucial to maintain a suitable buffer zone between these facilities.
3. Future Growth:
• The Mingara precinct is a dynamic hub for sports and community activities. The proposed development encroaches on the limited space available for future expansion of the precinct’s facilities. Reducing the precinct’s capacity will hinder its ability to cater to growing community needs and large-scale events in the future.

Alternative Proposal
I urge the council to consider an alternative design that allows for a more thoughtful balance between the needs of the athletics track, the broader community, and the aged care facility. A scaled-down proposal, with increased separation between the athletics track and the facility, could ensure privacy and tranquility for aged care residents while preserving parking and accessibility for the community. This could include additional paved parking in front of the athletics track to support its continued use.

Thank you for taking the time to consider this submission. I believe that with thoughtful planning, we can achieve a solution that benefits all parties.

In November 2023, Urbis and Mingara Leisure Group prepared a document outlining this proposed development and distributed copies to residents of Glengara Retirement Village together with an invitation to attend a Community Drop-in Session at Mingara Club on the following December 4 from 3.00 to 4.00 pm. Along with many fellow residents I attended that gathering with expectation of a well organised briefing. That proved to be a rather futile event for most of us, and resulting from the widely expressed disappointment Mingara agreed to undertake a further Project Information session for Glengara Residents at our Country Club on February 5, 2024 from 10.00 to 11.00 am.

With questions invited prior to this later event, supposedly to enable more direct response to concerns, it was hoped that we would at last receive a more understanding approach, given that it was also stated that Mingara and Partier were committed to a strong relationship with their neighbours. In fact that meeting saw many Glengara residents being refused questions, at times an arrogant approach in dismissing contentious items, and a reluctance to address particular issues with the excuse that an EIS would involve considerable review and additional detail.

As shown in the attached copy of a letter I addressed to Urbis and Mingara Leisure Group on 31 January 2024 there were a number of initial issues concerning me, including:
- insufficient consideration of the five storey 86 room hotel then under construction
- unknown effects of the proposed 112-place childcare centre
- excessive land usage, with increased population and aggravated parking issues
- increasing traffic challenges for both access and egress to site
- mockery of claim to be "nestling the buildings within the landscape"
- traffic congestion at nearby road intersections needing a close review

Whilst it could not be expected that satisfaction of such concerns would be immediate, it was thought that due consideration would be seen to have been given once the final documentation of an EIS and Development Application was completed.

It is interesting to note that some details of my submitted letter have in fact with additional planning been varied, with ILU's increasing from 208 to 219, High Care Suites increasing from33 to 39, but reduction in car spaces from 319 to 296. If anything, those changes magnify my concerns.

Review of the EIS does little to justify confidence in its integrity with at times quite questionable assumptions, a lack of more up-to-date detail especially on traffic implications, and my recall of the previously advanced fanciful conviction that the development will be (quote) "creating an uplifting environment that enables a connected and inclusive community". Seemingly the EIS has been prepared in a manner that glosses over the many negative aspects in order to achieve an unrealistic level of acceptability - and an assessment beyond reproach. In fact to the contrary it suggests a considerable degree of arrogance.

Provision of facilities for seniors living and residential aged care in itself is not justification for ignoring good planning principles and practice. And the now existing 5 level high- rise hotel adjacent to the Mingara Club should not be regarded as an acceptable precedent for the addition of a further 5 structures of even greater height. Already that building dwarfs the adjacent Club and appears somewhat out- of- place.

Having read the submission endorsed by the Glengara Village Residents Committee, I can not match their arguments with the same detailed and professional approach but am in hearty agreement with their analyses and conclusions. I offer my more simple comments as a concerned neighbour and resident within Glengara Village.

This proposal certainly involves excessive development, does not appropriately recognise the character of surrounding residential communities. and damages the visual aspect of natural surroundings that make Tumbi Umbi a beautiful place in which to live.

Certainly in it's present form the Development Proposal and Application should be refused.

Your serious considerations would be appreciated. Thank you.

I am concerned about parking for the Athletics centre. Where are those going to the Athletics centre going to park? The project at least needs to be smaller, so that there is parking available for the Athletics centre. There needs to be at least disabled parking and short stay parking out the front of the Athletics centre.

I object to this project due to concerns for the proximity to Mingara Athletics track and it effectively denying adequate parking for athletes and their family's and other community members who use the Atheletics track. There will also be no access for buses which are used by many local schools for their athletics carnivals throughout the year. Also Mingara Athletics track being one of the only first rate Athletics tracks in the region is a preferred location for many Zone and Regional Athletics events due to the facilities available at this track. Future events and bookings could be jeopardised as their will not enough parking to host such events in the future. My daughter is a member of Mingara Athletics and I am one of the Age managers of this great club. The club has currently over 500 members and without adequate parking there is great fears for the future of young Athletes in the area which would be devastating and a shame for the young aspiring boys and girls from the local community who deserve access to this top class facility along with their families. I've read there were agreements for at least 150 parking spots adjacent to the track which should be honoured. Please consider my submission on behalf of all our young kids wanting to be outside exercising and developing through Little Athletics. Thanks Mark

I am a resident on Palm Valley Road and my family use the facilities adjacent to the proposed development including but not limited to;
1. The Athletics Track;
2. Medical Facilities;
3. Food Outlets;
4: Mingara Recreational Club;
My concerns are detailed below;
i, My grandchildren use the athletics track on a regular basis and as such we utilise the current parking area adjacent to the athletics track which appears to be the specific area where the proposed new development is to be located. This represents a significant safety risk to a large number of children for access and egress to the track particularly at night. How does the new development address this safety risk and, who specifically will be legally responsible for the safety of the children having to access the track from another parking location;
ii, How will the increased traffic be managed given that currently it is difficult to safely move through the already congested entry points into and out of the Mingara facility. Please advise traffic modeling that has taken this into account;
iii, How have the changes to the hydrology modelling been addressed given the increased hard surfaces that will now collect stormwater and, presumably be directed as increased discharge flow into Tuggerah Lake as opposed to the stormwater being partially absorbed from the permeable surfaces and catchment ponds before directly flowing into Tuggerah Lake. Tuggerah Lake already had a significant problem with flooding and by removing the natural filtration systems and vegetation and replacing these with hard surfaces such as with the new development will potentially increase the risk from flooding. Who will be taking legal responsibility for this as a contributing factor to increasing the flooding risk to local residences around Tuggerah Lake;
iv, As a resident of the adjacent Palm Valley Road please advise traffic modeling impact on this road as a result of the new proposed development; and
v, What guarantees are there that eventually as development continues and, the State Government has development approval authority as opposed the the local government and residents that the Athletics Track is not going to be eventually replaced by more housing development.
Thanks
Craig Taylor

This will severely impinge on the ability for the residents of the central coast to use the athletics track safely and effectively. It is used by hundreds of school in their athletics carnivals as well as thousands of athletes to train and compete. To take away the ability of users to park in proximity of the track, especially in poor weather is unfair and unsafe.

As a close resident and a member of the public with grandchildren who regularly use the athletics track, I have a few concerns. Safety is paramount when you have a large number of small children attending their little athletics and school carnivals. Mingara athletics has a very large number of children and having a safe area for cars and buses to park will be jepidised. The entry is far too close. I fully understand the need for the elderly as I am over 60 myself but the needs and safety of our kids on the central coast, from what I have seen is many times overlooked. As a close resident I’m concerned about so many people being housed on our doorstep. I have always thought Mingara was a family club. Please consider all the family not just the elderly

Please see letter attached stating Athletics NSW objection to the opposed development

As a regular user of Mingara athletics club, a masters athletics competitor and vice president of Mingara regional athletics club, I have major concerns with the development of the 4 buildings. The proximity of the building to the track gate is ridiculous and removes all of our parking. What if an ambulance needs to get into the track to attend to someone? What happens when school carnivals or athletics comps are on and we have 300+ plus people attending and we have to park miles away? Disabled people will be impacted as will elderly grandparents going to watch their grandkids, and what about mums with young kids and strollers?

I get the need for aged care facilities but I don’t think they should be located in what is a sports hub with the pool, track and gym all in the one area.

I think 4 buildings in that one area is a little ambitious and will be way too overcrowded. The accommodation building recently built just fits on the lot it’s on and leaves no room around it at all and just looks out of place.


Build 1 and leave us plenty of room for parking and don’t make the area overcrowded and built out like the city.

My name is Christine Hennig.

I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed development of a retirement village , by Mingara Leisure Group in partnership with Pariter, adjacent to Mingaras sports facility and bordering Glengara Retirement Village and Jaegar Road.

When I first found out about Mingaras plans for this land I was not concerned as people deserve to be able to retire knowing that they can enjoy the rest of their lives in comfort and being part of a close knit community.

However when I, and about 150 other members of the local community, attended the initial advertised meeting where we could ask questions and discuss our concerns, people were horrified to find that the proposed development was going to be a mini city, rather than a development that would blend in seamlessly with the surrounding suburb.

The actually meeting was a farce and to all intents and purposes only held to tick a box necessary to move towards submitting a DA .
The way the venue had been set up asking questions was difficult and being able to hear the answersto questions that were asked was near impossible. There were 5 stations with individuals at each one addressing different aspects of the proposed development. They discussed the information relevant to their board and swiftly redirected people to other stations when questions not pertinent to theirs was addressed. It was crowded and people were confused and frustrated and many left rather than mill around and not get any real information.

M.LG and Pariter did come to Glengara for another more user friendly meeting but from the beginning the residents were disrespected and treated like children by the moderator and Mingaras CEO.

When a genuine concern was raised about the traffic flow and parking issues that would be a result of such a large development, raised because everyone is aware that parking and traffic flow when there is an interschool sporting event at the sports facility is very heavy , cars are often parked halfway across the reserve, when combined with MLC normal traffic flow, was met with a flippant response saying that there would be little impact, that there is more than enough parking.
People laughed as they have all seen and experienced the traffic congestion.

Instead of taking the time to discuss these concerns further the Moderator sharply rebuked everyone and threaten to close the meeting down if anyone laughed again.

At this 2nd meeting CEO of Mingara was the hard nosed no nonsense man basically informing those in attendance that they should be grateful that MLG and Pariter weren't building a huge Entertainment Center or Stadium on the site.
Then he used guilt card. We should be happy for this development because it will allow people living in houses too big for them to downsize, making way for our children and grandchildren to buy a home.
Then he went onto indicate that thousands of people are moving to the Central Coast and there is a huge need for suitable accommodation for them.

Are they all coming to Tumbi Umbi?
I don't think so.
This was not an information opportunity but rather a chance for people who came along to be told that there was very little if nothing they could do as this devilment would go ahead. Even when we questioned the current zoning, Private Recreational , and the massive leap to High Density Residential necessary for such a huge development to proceed no answer, except that they could virtually "build what they want " on the site was given.
There was one final meeting with M.L.G but it was just an opportunity for Migaras CEO to be the "nice "guy this time and tell everyone all about the projects that they had undertaken over the last 12 months.

If you are downsizing and want to live in an apartment I'm sure that value for money, you would buy an apartment closer to the beach. You can still access necessary supports in your own home, and be within walking distance to the shops and the beach.
Why would you choose to move into an apartment overlooking a club, a carpark and a sports field?
A large number of people living at Glengara have moved from apartments into their villas so that they can have their families over with their grandchildren and not have the worry of noise from these family gatherings impacting on the people living in adjoining units.

The proposed development consists of 32 two story villas and five multi storey buildings ranging from five to seven stories.
This is High Density Residential and in ño way blends in with the surrounding neighbourhood.

How is this possible, especially when Tumbi Umbi and the surrounding suburbs are zoned Low Denisity residential with nothing built over two stories.

Prior to the Hotel development Mingara nestled into the suburb and had no real impact on it, the adjoining retirement village, Glengara, blends seamlessly into the area too and when it applied for approval to build a facility to accommodate seniors who had high support needs were granted approval on condition that the development would not exceed the 2 storey limit.
How has M.L.G and Pariter's development not had the same restrictions placed on its development?

Is Mingara taking advantage of the fact that their application for the six story hotel was approved and think they can now take not just an inch but the full mile.
The hotel application was approved on the premise that Mingara would develop the sports facility to a standard that would attract bigger events, with them being able to offer accommodation for spectators and athletes at their Hotel.

Building this behemoth will not allow this development of the sporting complex to proceed.

Concerns was around the Health services in the area were addressed in the same cavalier manner that the whole meeting had been handled.
The CEOs answer being, and I am quoting him, " this is not our responsibility."

Again I beg to differ.

The closest Medical Centre has closed its books to all but emergencies and have stated categorically that they have no intention of expanding the practice. Other nearby medical centres and private practices have also closed their books.

If you build a retirement complex that has accommodation for 32 high support people and 200+ people living in the Independant Living Options, you must take into consideration that a majority of people moving into it will need access to medical facilities.

There is a Duty of Care, a responsibility to ensure that appropriate services can be accessed by the people you are selling this lifestyle too.

Everybody as they age need more medical care, not less.
The CEO's attitude bordered on negligence.

Both M.L.G and Pariter have said that they were building something that would blend in with the surrounding suburb and that the impact on people's privacy, those bordering the development, had been considered.

Once again I disagree.

The residents bordering the perimeter of this proposed mini city will have their privacy compromised.

All the homes on the fence line of Glengara and Jaegar road will be overlooked.

The homes in Glegara all have their main bedroom, kitchen and lounge rooms looking out onto the land that the 5 and 7 multi story towers (apartment blocks) are to be built on.

The proposed towers will loom over these single storey homes, threatening the sense of seclusion and tranquillity and leading to an unwanted invasion of privacy for the residents whose homes border the development forcing many people to keep blinds or curtains drawn at all times and stop them enjoying time in their backyards.

Privacy will be lost as anyone in the towers will be able to see directly into all these areas, especially at night.

Traffic flow is another major concern.

One that again was dismissed by both the Mingara CEO and Pariter's representative at all meetings held.

With 2 preschools already at capacity on Hansens Road plus a primary school, fast food outlets , Petrol Station and Mingara Recreation Club with all its facilities the traffic flow can at peak times be a nightmare and will without exaggeration become dangerous with the approval and building of this proposed mini city.
Children and people of all ages take advantage of the clubs facilities all day, accessing not only the club itself but the swimming complex, the gym, karate studio, physio, hairdresser and Mingaras restaurants.
During the school year the sports field is used at a minimum 3 days a week with parking spilling across the area for the proposed development at 90% of the events.

This development will create an influx of cars that will compromise safety and parking and unless major work is undertaken on Wyong Road, Mingara Lane and Hansens Road will be a nightmare for everyone not only living in close proximity to the development but anyone attending Mingara Recreation Club.

When Mingara had its DA approved for the Hotel there was specific comments on the traffic flow with a caveat that Wyong Road would be near capacity with the Hotels construction and that it would not be able to accommodate any further major developments until Wyong Road had had a major upgrade.

To date this upgrade has not been done.

Tumbi Umbi and the surrounding suburbs are all peaceful and family orientated and even though there is an industrial area across the road from Mingara all buildings are single story and do not impact noticeably on the suburb.

Again I would like to stress that I am not objecting to the construction of a Retirement Village on this site but am asking that the proposal on the scale presented be rejected in favour of a low density development that will not compromise the character and integrity of Tumbi Umbi and the surrounding suburbs.

I am asking that Mingara and Pariter be asked to genuinely look at and address the concerns that were brought to their attention on numerous occasions.

Thank you for your consideration,

Christine Hennig.

Anyone that is familiar with Mingara Recreation Club will know that it has one entry road and two exits from its facilities. The one entry point also includes other commercial businesses along with a multitude of restaurant franchises. To now consider creating an even more excrutiating point of congestion with 219 independent living units and 39 high care suites is just ludicrous. If a study on the amount of vehicular movements was undertaken to determine these volumes on a Thursday, Fridayevening or on a weekend, it would clearly show a dangerous environment for elderly or high care memebers of this facility. This does not even consider the intermittent occasions when there is a major swimming or track and field event being held at Mingara, where the carparks reach capacity and driver behaviour is questionable.
This proposal has not been considered appropriately and requires further insight and infrastructure before even considering further development in this vicinty.
I vehemently oppose this development in its current format

As a Coach at the track, I am required to bring equipment to and from the track. Under this proposed development, there is no where close I am able to leave my vehicle.

As a coach, it is my responsibility to attend meets at the track. On several occasions, I have had to use the Mingara club car park as overflow parking due to the existing track car park being full.

The Mingara club has already cut their parking with the building of their new accommodation.

The Mingara club is the premium entertainment venue for the area and hosts several events a years. These fill the existing car park and in many cases, cars need to use the track car park as overflow.

Parking at the Athletics Track will be limited, forcing participants to park in nearby residential areas, which may inconvenience local residents. Accessing the track from these areas requires walking through the wetlands and crossing a creek that often floods during wet weather, making it unsafe. This poses significant challenges for able-bodied participants and creates near-impossible conditions for those with disabilities. Additionally, parents picking up junior athletes after training will face difficulties if parking near the facility is unavailable. For female participants, walking to residential areas in the dark could raise safety concerns.