Secrecy doubt over council’s skyline rethink
RESIDENTS fear councillors will move into closed session on Thursday to debate City Plan changes that will prevent the Gold Coast developing a “Gotham-bythe-sea” skyline.
Councillors have been fiercely lobbied by two groups – developers want to stall the planning changes and property owners want the recommended amendments to go forward so they can protect their lifestyle at Palm Beach and Labrador.
The peer review by Ethos Urban and PSA Consulting, which cost ratepayers $54,000, recommends a rethink by the council due to the negative economic impact of COVID-19.
Consultants are likely to give a presentation in open session but several sources suggest councillors will go behind closed doors before voting on the review’s recommendations.
The changes were created after an unprecedented three sessions of community consultation. Some of the amendments covered population targets, and site density and building heights in Palm Beach and near the Broadwater being reduced.
If councillors agree with consultants and delay sending the amendments to be ticked off by the State Government, developers get a window of at least 12 months for applications under the current, more relaxed City Plan.
“I don’t think this (the debate) will be going anywhere in public,” a council source said.
Planning chair Cameron Caldwell said: “It is my personal preference to keep the meeting in open session unless there are compelling reasons of confidentiality to move to closed.”
Mayor Tom Tate earlier sent out an email, which included Cr Caldwell and Deputy Mayor Donna Gates, admitting he was “anxious” about the impact of the planning changes on the construction industry given the weakening of the economy.
Sources cannot predict the vote on the review.
Many new councillors had supported residents, fearing the coastline would resemble a “Gotham by-the-sea” skyline.
“Are councillors going to pause it because they don’t want to hurt development and wind it back?” a source said.
“If they want to be antidevelopment they will move forward with the City Plan amendments in their current proper form.”
Another source said: “There are councillors who believe the council shouldn’t rewind all the work, that it would be ridiculous to do that.”
Community Alliance president John Hicks said residents who had taken part in the consultation wanted the presentation and debate before the council vote to take place in open session.
“For the purpose of transparency and to demonstrate the integrity of the planning process, the whole of the session should be in open,” he said.
“We want to know whether councillors are standing up for the City Plan changes, and whether councillors are standing up for developers.
“We would hope each of the new councillors are afforded the opportunity to speak at the planning committee.”