Decision imminent on luxury Park Beach twin tower development in Coffs Harbour

High-flyers would snap up these snazzy beachfront digs, but those against the controversial Coffs development say it’s too tall and “Gold Coast-like”.

A concept image of the proposed $14.2 million twin tower development.

A decision is imminent on a luxe multimillion-dollar twin tower residential development at one of the most prized locations in Coffs Harbour.

Two 13-storey apartment blocks are on the table for the northern end of Ocean Parade at Park Beach.

The 3110 square metre site neighbours the iconic and celebrated Pacific Towers development.

The twin tower $14.2 million development – advertised publicly a year ago – is set to go before Coffs Harbour council for determination at its meeting on Thursday.

A wave of public submissions – mostly for, some against (particularly citing the removal of 50-plus trees) – have been lodged.

The recommendation from staff is that council approve the development, subject to consent conditions.

This is where the towers would be built.

The proposal for Lot 51 Ocean Pde includes:

– Removal of 0.23 hectares of vegetation (including 55 trees)

– Construction of two 13-storey residential flat buildings (almost 40-metres tall); and

– The provision of 53 carparking spaces.

The applicant, Globuild Pty Ltd, has parried the tree removal concerns by offering to enter into a Voluntary Planning Agreement with the City of Coffs Harbour and the Coffs Coast Regional Park Trust – to make a monetary contribution for the purpose of offsite environmental works.

When the development was first advertised in December last year, 19 submissions were received, 14 of these in support.

The residential development would include 22 apartments, 11 in each tower.

Both buildings would have a communal open space, swimming pool, and lobby, while the northern tower would include a gym for residents.

A council assessment has found all apartments of the proposed development are above the 1-in-100 year flood level, and the building would provide a refuge in the event of a “probable maximum flood”.

Council staff have concluded the development would also create an element of “casual surveillance”, boosting security for those walking to and from the beach.

Public submissions in favour of the development noted it appeared to be of “high quality”, was a “long-awaited” proposal for the site and would attract more professional workers to the area.

Those against described the development as “Gold Coast-like” and expressed concern about height and overshadowing of nearby buildings.