A major oil company has flagged that it plans to lodge a submission about building density in the Snug Cove and Environs Draft Master Plan that is now on public exhibition, Bega Valley Shire Council director of planning, environment and development services Garret Barry said on Tuesday.
Mr Barry said he had received an e-mail from one of the two oil companies that operate at Snug Cove, stating it intended to lodge a submission about the lack of building density in the master plan.
He declined to say whether the company concerned was Mobil or BP, which individually own the two sites at Snug Cove where the disused fuel storage tanks stand.
"One of the oil companies will probably make a submission about building density," Mr Barry said.
The oil company was concerned the master plan was not delivering enough density in the port precinct, he explained.
The oil companies saw greater opportunities than the three-storey height limit on building in the master plan presented, he commented.
Mr Barry said he had not yet received the company's submission so he did not know what it contained.
At least 50 people attended a public information night on the draft plan at the Eden Fishermen's Club last Thursday to hear about its progress.
The draft plan, which will provide a framework to guide the development of Snug Cove and environs as a commercial port, retail centre and residential centre during the next 20 years, will be on exhibition until the display period finishes next Friday, September 10.
Residents at the information night expressed a range of concerns about issues including heavy vehicle movements, road access, car parking, building heights, views, and public safety.
Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources [DIPNR planners and Mr Barry were present as the council and the department are developing the master plan together.
Mr Barry said he believed the three-storey limit on building heights proposed in the plan "reasonably addressed" the issue of views as it satisfied both the needs of commercial operators and of nearby residents to retain at least some views of the port.
"All existing buildings will retain some view corridors," he said.
A balance needed to be found between commercial interests and residents' interests, he stated.
Mr Barry said that after the meeting he had tried an exercise to address residents' concerns about proposals to move some car parking spaces from the port and into nearby Imlay Street.
He had driven his car up Imlay Street above the wharf and had been readily able to park on the sloping street at an angle to the kerb.
He had estimated that cars angle parked on either side rear or front to kerb would still leave enough space for two lanes of traffic to safely pass along the centre of the street.
Mr Barry said it was possible to park anywhere along the street if parking was properly planned but conceded the steepest part was not ideal for vehicles to park.
He commented that the parking layout in the master plan was "diagrammatic" and was only conceptual at this stage so it was hard for residents to see how a revised parking plan would work.
Only some of the current car parking spaces near the wharf would be moved to Imlay Street, with most of the parking still remaining in the port precinct Mr Barry noted.
Centre parking in Imlay Street is included in the lower sections of the street, the plan shows.
"It would free up the wharf area to provide more enjoyable public spaces."