For some time I have been struggling with the thought that a Heritage Town, such as Bangalow is to be rezoned as an Industrial/commercial precinct. This was initially prompted by the letter of Ean Jones (Byron Shire Echo, July 19. 17) .
While there are many issues of deep concern re this proposed development; it certainly is revealing a proposed status that falls under the legislation governing ‘Designated Development’. (This feature sent the Club Med developers to the Land and Environment Court).
As such this status demands a full Environmental Impact Study (EIS). It appears that all that has been applied for in the current DA is a series of industrial buildings and car parks, for the mega load of traffic that is to travel through the main areas of the township. There is no certainty of what industries are to be carried out in the buildings.
We are informed that this is agricultural land; as such the developer cannot seek development consent for empty industrial buildings. Obviously more information is required to conform to the dictates required by development applications. Furthermore, the legalities governing the state government Planning Policy No. 33, governing hazardous and Offensive Development Act must be adhered.
If the DA does not supply information on the amount of traffic generated, car parking required, air quality, odours and wastes generated, then it is of greater concern for the community. Most significant is the issue of noise. A growing irritation in the city and no doubt to be the same in Bangalow. The developer must adhere to the legalities addressed in the ‘Noise Impact Assessment Act (2016)’.
The current status of Byron Shire’s waste water continues to be of great concern; and rightly so given the toxins that can exist in proposed water-flows. The proposed West Byron developer/development is dealing with this issue in an ad hoc and inadequate manner. The community must call for Legislative Policy application when addressing water infrastructure. What effluent and wastes will this Bangalow development release?
To deeply nail the issue addressing the need for an EIS; this will be further compounded if these proposed Rural Industries produce more than 30.000 tonnes per year of waste, effluent etc.
The most outstanding question is …will effluent be disposed on site within metres of the Byron Creek? What outlet for waste is proposed?
It is hard to know what sense the JRPP will make from such a ‘void-less” DA! Who is the head honcho guiding this development? (Honcho’s exist in State and Local governance).
When IKEA, a very large development was proposed in Tempe, Sydney, Marrickville Council swung into action to seek information from the surrounding communites who also live in heritage homes. Traffic was a major concern. The council treated the community with respect and integrity and a solution was created.
One can only hold their breath with this Bangalow proposed development. It reveals all of the characteristics of the developers who have successfully avoided imperative state/local legislation governing community and environmental rights (social Impact statements, flora and fauna and enviromental impact studies).
With no guiding principles and an abuse of public interest by state and local governments, communities will continue to be either exploited or outraged. This is no solution and it blatantly violates the rights of a civil society.
Finally, when will council formally ratify the rezoning of Bangalow to the status to that of an industrial estate? This is a question of great public interest.
Jo Faith, Newtown
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
