The owners of a former nursing home at Toukley are making a sixth attempt to have a boarding house approved on the site at 51 Peel St.
Amendments to the development proposal have been lodged with Central Coast Council, following a conciliation conference in July called by the Land and Environment Court.
New information submitted on October 19 is contained in updated documents such as the Noise Impact Assessment, Acoustic Assessment, Social Impact Assessment, Architectural Plan and Plan of Management.
Property owners, operating under the company name Seranin Group, want to convert the vacant former nursing home to a 55-room boarding house for up to 93 people, predominantly males, but with only 32 parking spaces.
Over the years, the proposal has been amended and scaled back, Council has received hundreds of objections, and in 2020 the Local Planning Panel rejected it for several reasons but basically because it was substandard.
This new amended development application number 222 is open for public comment until Friday, November 18.
Eileen Chijoff says two particular clauses added to the Plan of Management will cause further issues with the wider Toukley community.
The Plan says in clause 9.7 that residents (of the boarding house) who are not allocated an onsite parking space will be encouraged to park at nearby public parking areas such as Toukley Lookout or Osborne Park off Peel St.
“While legislation does not exist to stop anyone from using the public parking areas, utilising Osborne Park as an overflow parking solution for the proposed boarding house would impact the availability of parking space for Coast Guard volunteers, users of the boat shed and users of the playground equipment,” Chijoff said.
“Also, the so-called Toukley Lookout is an unsealed area on the side of Peel St where drivers can pull off to the side of the road to look at the view of the lake.
“There is room for about two or three cars and if Toukley Lookout is used as an overflow parking solution it also impacts the availability of its use to visitors to the area.”
Chijoff also wants to alert the community to clause 10.2 in the Plan of Management which refers to quarterly meetings between the boarding house manager, community liaison committee, police and Council to ensure the boarding house is a “good neighbour” and to address any emerging problems.
“The expectation that local people would volunteer their time to be part of this strategy is an encroachment on their peaceful existence,” she said.
“This is an entitled attitude by whoever devised this strategy that the onus be placed on the local community to monitor the behaviour of boarding house residents for the purpose of proactively deterring any issues arising.
“This is a blatant overreach by the owner/developer who sets out to make a financial gain by conscripting volunteer services of local residents as a means of ensuring the smooth operation of their profit-making enterprise,” Chijoff said.
Some time ago residents formed a facebook group called Concerned Residents of Proposal for Boarding, Toukley, to share information and present a united front in opposing this proposal.
Residents have opposed the boarding house mainly because of a poor management model, over-development, wellbeing impacts on mental health and isolation leading to escalation of anti-social behaviour, too far from services, traffic and parking problems and pedestrian safety along the narrow ill-formed Peel St.
“The proposed large scale boarding house would introduce an institution or ghetto-like environment that the community does not need or want,” Chijoff said.
The amended development application number 222 is open for public comment until Friday, November 18.
Sue Murray