Letter to the Editor: What are the long term costs?

DEAR News Of The Area,

WHENEVER I see “revitalise” or “vibrant” in a planning document, I follow the money to see which developer will benefit, knowing it will not be the public.

Councillors and our local Member need to get out more, see the hundreds of people walking and vitally socialising from 6.00am in this area, see the actual current use of the intended development by families, picnickers, boaters, swimmers, dogwalkers, runners, walkers and just plain coffee drinkers. Despite the recent efforts of City of Coffs Harbour to make the area less interesting with sterile metal fencing, the area is positively vibrating.

And safe, despite developers’ dog whistles about making the area “safe” by building up to eight storeys.

More attention needs to be paid to well-founded issues detailed by independent civil engineers about coastal erosion, seawall costs, snarled traffic and lack of parking which will be inevitable if planned development proceeds.

It is not enough for elected and unelected officials to witter on about “lies” and “misinformation” in response to detailed objections – what are the facts and long-term costs?

I am with the super-majority 68.7 percent of local people who voted against the Draft Jetty Foreshore Concept Plan and the transparent attempts by fronts for developers to thwart our wishes and steal for their benefit an unrivalled vital public area and an essential barrier for coastal erosion with sea level rises and increasing storm activity.

We will be ignored at the peril of those who arrogantly presume to have a broader vision than those of us who have chosen to live here and those who have put in so much voluntary work to make it the attractive and thriving place it is now.

Yours sincerely,
Howard DENGATE,
Safety Beach.