Public has spoken on city plan
COFFS Harbour City councillors will tonight examine the results of public submissions on the Coffs Harbour City Centre Development Control Plan.
The Draft Coffs Harbour City Centre DCP, which applies only to the area mapped for the plan, will repeal the provisions of all current DCPs for that area.
The area includes the Jetty and harbour, Park Beach as far west as HomeBase, the Bray St area and the CBD, including West High St, but excludes West Coffs Harbour.
The council received 391 submissions during the public exhibition, including 212 pro-forma submissions.
Of the total received, 257 related to the harbour and foreshores land located east of the railway line.
A number of submissions wanted the Jetty Foreshores identified as a “special area” within the draft DCP and to be accompanied by specific objectives that seek to maintain the public recreation value of this land.
Staff commented these were contained in the Land and Property Management Authority 2008 Plan of Management for the area.
Railcorp supported B4 Business Mixed Use for Railcorp land; supported a 15.5-metre maximum height; requested it be contained in a single character precinct in the DCP, and; the DCP be amended to remove a reference on p91 to “railway land – possible future development”.
The Australian Rail Track Corporation asked railway land be a separate special area, but staff said the land was incorporated into the Jetty Village special area and it was not appropriate to treat this site in isolation.
Other submissions on the Jetty related to heights at the rear of the existing restaurant strip on the south side of Harbour Dr as well as heights on land north of Harbour Dr and west of Orlando St.
A section on view sharing for assessment at the development application stage has been added to the draft DCP.
For the Forestry site, an architectural design competition clause applies and development will be checked against items in the design excellence clause.
A request to limit development on the old base hospital site to two storeys was considered inappropriate, given the site’s medium density zoning and what was already built or already permitted to be built in the surrounding area.
Instead, concerns over views in such view-sensitive locations are to be addressed with the preparation of shadow diagrams and view impact analysis.