Rumour mill rumbles amid Jetty Foreshore developments
QUESTIONS are being asked this week across the Coffs Harbour community what the State Government is planning for railway-owned crown land on the Jetty Foreshores.
Sources have told the Advocate there have been consultation meetings with Department of Lands staff and community leaders this week over a development up to 10-storeys off Jordan Esplanade and an announcement on the planning process is imminent.
It is understood the NSW Government has had soft sounding meetings with accommodation groups.
Just last week, NSW's chief planner Gary White was in Coffs Harbour to meet with community and business leaders.
The Advocate also understands there was a recent letterbox drop by Jetty residents speculating on the details of the State Government's plan for railway-owned land fronting Jordan Esplanade following a lengthy planning process.
There are public concerns, if a 10-storey development does go ahead, it could drastically affect the views of residents on Camperdown and Edinburgh St.
Coffs Harbour City councillor Sally Townley last May confirmed the NSW Government was in negotiations over a multi-storey development of crown land.
Cr Townley said plans included concepts of buildings up to 10-storeys east of Jordan Esplanade.
Coffs Harbour MP Andrew Fraser at the same time opposed any development on the eastern side of Jordan Esplanade, giving some reassurance it wouldn't happen.
"I will rally against it. If it did, I would cross the floor," Mr Fraser told the Advocate.
He said if the development was to reach the 10-storey maximum it would be north of Marina Dr.
But since then all has gone quiet, despite community speculation on when the public will be briefed on the plans.
Do you support private development on Crown land at the Jetty Foreshores
Last year the Advocate ran an online poll where readers were divided about the leaked plans.
It was almost a very equal split between those who were against any private development of the area and those who believed it would create more tourism opportunity.
Of the 1075 votes, 335 or 31 per cent voted an emphatic no to any development.
A further 177 readers voted no to the development, as they didn't see any need it east of the railway.
While 330 readers voted in favour as the foreshores needed greater tourist appeal, making up 30 per cent of voters.
Additionally, 144 readers agreed with the development so long as it responsible and approved after community consultation.
A small margin of readers (85) needed to see the plans and another four were completely undecided.
The poll allowed one vote per device and was not scientific.