Letter to the Editor: Majority didn’t want residential development

DEAR News Of The Area,

SOME people just choose their facts to suit their opinions.

Your correspondent, Patrick Walters (‘Does Council have a spare $6.7 million?’, 9 February Edition), is a prime example.

Apart from criticising the Coffs Council’s commercial deal/offer to the state government without fully examining the proposal, he then goes on to criticise their Foreshore plan on the basis of one selected sweeping statement:

‘Extensive research has shown that there is a majority support for responsible development which would inject some life into this area’.

He ignores the fact that the majority rejected completely any residential development (tourist, low-cost, or permanent).

It is also obvious that Mr Walters rarely (if ever) visits the foreshores.

As a regular visitor/user of the foreshores, I can assure him that it is often very lively.

It is so lively on many occasions that parking opportunities are stretched to the limit.

In fact visitors have to utilise the areas proposed for residential development for parking.

Meanwhile, the state government (probably the Planning and Economic Development Dept) have spent millions on the boat ramp area.

It looks great and has created a lovely sheltered beach (thanks to poorly designed seawall extension), even if boat access from the harbour is restricted.

However the beach use is limited because when all the millions of dollars were spent they still left the area with just six to eight public parking spaces to access the beach.

All the beautifully landscape parking is for cars with boat trailers.

For the past forty years the consultation has always come up with the same majority response; no residential development east of the railway.

Yet still a minority want to push ahead with such development.

Coffs Harbour.

Leave a Reply