Menu

Planning staff support questionable Main Arm DA

The existing road is not aligned in the with the crown reserve (outlined in red) therefore the to access the RoC all road users are passing over private property to access their land. To align it in the crown reserve would mean the road my have to be partially built in the local water way and install several bridges. Image pixmaps.

Local residents of Coopers Lane West in Main Arm have raised concerns regarding Council staff’s recommendation for approval of a dual occupancy in an area that was identified as a high fire-danger area during the recent bushfires.

‘At the Mullumbimby fire meeting, and in the media, Coopers Lane was identified as a high-risk area for fire danger, particularly the area where this dual occupancy has been applied for,’ said local resident Peta Best.

According to residents, Council staff have recommended approval for the duplication of house numbers on this lot even though fire regulations for road access are not being met.

They claim the DA does not meet the Planning for Bushfire Protection (December 2006) regulations.

‘The RoC (Right of Carriageway) that crosses our property does not meet these regulations,’ said Ms Best.

‘To even reach the RoC they have to cross our private land because the existing road is not aligned in the  crown reserve. To align it in the crown reserve would mean the road my have to be partially built in the local water way and install several bridges.

‘Once they have crossed our private land to the existing road where they have an RoC this RoC doesn’t sit within the legal RoC. Further, the RoC it isn’t legally wide enough to meet the 2006 and 2019 fire regulation requirements either in width or in relation to how steep the road is.’

Another resident affected by the development is former councillor Duncan Dey. He told Echonetdaily that ‘This hill, where staff say it is okay to add another dwelling, is serviced by a single lane road of inadequate width, and not sitting within various RoC.

‘The most precarious RoC is only 5m wide, and is 630m long. Nowhere does this RoC have the minimum width of 8m required for passing bays, of which there should be at least four’.

‘I feel really sorry for the landowner who recently bought the property,’ said Ms Best. ‘I understand he approached Council staff and was told that it wouldn’t be hard to get the approval for a dual occupancy’.

♦ The Echo’s Aslan Shand is an affected resident.


Support The Echo

Keeping the community together and the community voice loud and clear is what The Echo is about. More than ever we need your help to keep this voice alive and thriving in the community.

Like all businesses we are struggling to keep food on the table of all our local and hard working journalists, artists, sales, delivery and drudges who keep the news coming out to you both in the newspaper and online. If you can spare a few dollars a week – or maybe more – we would appreciate all the support you are able to give to keep the voice of independent, local journalism alive.


One response to “Planning staff support questionable Main Arm DA”

  1. NorthCoastSocialista says:

    If fire is that much of a threat for a net increase of 1 new home, then surely all of the homes are under threat and need to be demolished!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

Echonetdaily is made possible by the support of all of our advertisers and is brought to you by this week's sponsor, the Byron Residents' Group.