19.3 C
Byron Shire
April 20, 2024

Byron Council staff target Main Arm residents over unauthorised dwellings

Latest News

Infrastructure for east end of Mullum

Mullumbimby was founded 135 years ago. In the 1960s sewerage was introduced, as was I suppose drainage infrastructure. Are...

Other News

The bridges of Ballina Council

Ballina Shire Council has started preliminary investigation works at Fishery Creek Bridge, on River Street, and Canal Bridge, on Tamarind Drive, as part of their plan to duplicate both bridges.

Funds sought to complete clubhouse

Byron Bay Football Club may finally get the funds to complete its new clubhouse, with Byron councillors to consider loaning the club $200,000 at this week’s meeting.

Not enough letters like this about Gaza in The Echo?

The Echo’s studied indifference to the plight of the Palestinians and its reluctance to publish letters on the subject...

Wage peace not war

Northern Rivers Peace group, Remembering and Healing is inviting all community members to a peace gathering on the eve of ANZAC Day.

Local grom takes national tube-riding prize

Local grom takes national tube-riding prize. Broken Head surfer Leihani Zoric has taken out first place in the U/14 girls and best barrel (girl) categories of the Australian Junior Online Surf Championships.

Anti-Israel bias

Many locals have approached me to say how shocked they are at the extreme anti-Israel bias that is expressed...

Aslan Shand

Residents in Main Arm are shocked after Byron Shire Council staff sent out letters accusing property owners of having unauthorised development on their land while there is both a moratorium in place and an unauthorised dwelling policy currently on public exhibition.

Councillors seemed to be taken by surprise that the letter had been sent, with councillor Cate Coorey telling The Echo that the policy was currently on public exhibition until 24 September and ‘therefore staff have bolted at the gate’ by having pre-emptively sent out the letters.

Councillor Michael Lyon agreed, saying that ‘the [unauthorised dwelling] policy was endorsed, and would not be adopted until it came back to Council’ once public submissions had closed.

One local, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told The Echo that it seemed to be a phishing letter as it stated ‘Council has identified unauthorised development at the above-mentioned address,’ but that it didn’t identify any particular issues.

‘They are assuming that things are unauthorised and are essentially asking people to dob themselves in.’

According to multiple sources that The Echo spoke to, it appears that Council has targeted houses for which it lacks records. It is well known that the Byron Shire Council records are incomplete as a result of losing records in a fire, then a flood, and the fact that many records were put onto microfiche that subsequently went mouldy. Numerous properties that received letters have dwellings that pre-date Council records.

However, some of these residents have since been informed that as their dwellings were built prior to records being kept by Council, Council is not interested in them after all.

‘This is the wrong way to go about rectifying unauthorised dwellings,’ pointed out the source.

Residents have been left upset and highly stressed in some circumstances with many older residents saying that they are concerned about losing their homes. Concerns raised included the cost of bringing residences up to current fire regulations and building standards, as well as the risk of a demolition order.

However, Cr Coorey also pointed out that, ‘A lot of people are profiting substantially from illegal (and also substandard and unsafe) dwellings – obviously not everyone.’

‘We are asking people who are doing the wrong thing to take the opportunity to begin this [process] and make amends,’ she told The Echo.

Timeframe issues

‘In principle I’m in agreement with the idea of having houses regularised but it isn’t a simple issue in many cases,’ said another Main Arm resident who didn’t want to be identified.

‘There are houses that have been partially built on other people’s land, access issues, some properties are dealing with government departments to sort out some aspects, and that can take well over ten years to resolve. Council need to really consider the complexities that people may face in sorting these issues out. How is someone supposed to afford $40–$100,000 worth of upgrades on an aged pension? One to two years just isn’t enough time, for some issues it will take five to ten years to resolve.’

Lack of confidence

Many residents also cited a lack of confidence that Council staff would fairly deal with the issues. This was highlighted when some applicants were told to withdraw their applications or others – like Ben McIntosh from New Brighton (see The Echo of 26 August, page 7), who was told he couldn’t apply for regularisation – were refused an explanation from staff as to why they were excluded.

Responding to questions from The Echo, Mayor Simon Richardson said, ’The last thing I want, or have ever wanted, is to kick people out of their homes across the hinterland. I lived in many of these types of dwellings myself… and usually they are owned by people who care for the land and the community. That is why a number of years ago I pushed to have the brochure made to show owners ways they could become compliant… Council staff were, and still are, of the same belief. This is a housing issue, and we don’t want to create a homelessness issue.’

However, another local resident pointed out that, ‘There are reasons to be concerned, especially as Council is not in a position to say how the process ends for properties that cannot trivially be made compliant.’

This was supported by another local who highlighted that the letter didn’t include the information that under pathway 3, also in the draft Unauthorised Dwellings Policy, enforcement action can include an order to ‘demolish/restore to previously approved use as appropriate’. This order has been used in relation to the dwelling of Mr McIntosh in New Brighton.

The letter from Council requests a response by 5 October from the recipient. According to many residents this has caused considerable consternation, distress and confusion to residents who are asking why Council are providing a 15 month moratorium, but then demanding responses within a month. However, according to Cr Lyon it is just staff giving a ‘heads-up’ to ‘start a conversation’.

‘The deadline date is a request to respond to what is a “show cause” letter, not an enforcement letter,’ he said in response to The Echo’s questions.

‘Some people have become alarmed at the letter, given the deadline date but I would like to reassure everybody that the original moratorium is very much in place and sometimes the information Council is working off is wrong, such as aerial photography. That is what staff are attempting to do, is open up a conversation and clear up any wrong information, and if there are unapproved dwellings on site, start the process towards compliance.’

More letters to come

While Main Arm appears to be the first area targeted, according to Mayor Richardson, Council ‘will be batching letters in other areas progressively’.

‘I think it is also key to acknowledge that though liability is a legitimate concern when it comes to bushfire risk, what is more important for staff, councillors and indeed all of us, is loss of homes, livestock and human life. The hundreds of people who packed Mullum Hall last year were not “liabilities” – they were scared, concerned, and at-risk locals – and I was one of them.’

Residents meeting

Concerned residents have brought the issue to the attention of the Main Arm Residents Association (MARA) who are organising a meeting for concerned residents and other members of the community who would like to explore how to respond. The meeting will take place at the Main Arm Store this Saturday, 19 September at 3pm. Otherwise, you can leave a message on 6684 5152 and a member of MARA will get back to you to discuss your concerns.

More on unauthorised dwellings

Unapproved cabin stop order upheld

The NSW Land & Environment Court has upheld Byron Council’s decision to order a local landowner to stop renting out a 40-year-old rural cabin in Middle Pocket because it was an unapproved dwelling.


Cartoon of the week – 28 October, 2020

We love to receive letters, but not every letter will be published; the publication of letters is at the discretion of the online and print letters editors.


Resident groups split over unauthorised dwelling policy

With Council extending public submissions  by one week for landowners to respond to the draft Unauthorised Dwelling Policy, resident groups appear to be divided on the issue.


How to reply to Council’s draft Unauthorised Dwelling Policy?

With Council’s draft Unauthorised Dwelling Policy causing alarm and stress within the hinterland community, the Main Arm Residents Association (MARRA) have authored a guide to help residents lodge a submission. But remember this policy also applies to urban areas.


Unauthorised development – what is Council’s liability and where is the...

Further to Council’s aggressive plans to pursue unauthorised development in the Shire’s hinterland, The Echo spoke to Professor John Sheehan, a leading expert on property rights, who explained the issues that both Council and landowners face with regards to development and compliance.


Byron Council staff target Main Arm residents over unauthorised dwellings

Residents in Main Arm are shocked after Byron Shire Council staff sent out letters accusing property owners of having unauthorised development on their land while there is both a moratorium in place and an unauthorised dwelling policy currently on public exhibition.


Exploring the risks of illegal dwellings

The Byron Shire and the Northern Rivers are well known for their abundent range of illegal dwellings, additions, and converted garages.


Byron Shire’s unauthorised dwelling approval policy goes public

Byron Council’s plan to provide the owners of unauthorised dwellings with an avenue to seek approval has proceeded to the next stage, with councillors dismissing a number of amendments requested by a community group.


Byron Shire Council’s illegal dwelling policy scant on detail

A change to a crucial definition in the Byron Shire Council’s Draft Unauthorised Dwelling Policy that comes to Council this week has been criticised by Community Action Byron Shire spokesperson, Duncan Dey.


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.


  1. Council has created this shit-fight by turning a blind eye for too long, and in many cases they have been made aware of illegal clearing as well as construction, and done nothing.
    It seems to me, having done a LEGAL development, that Council is bending over backwards to ignore or help people who have built illegally, yet one is ‘punished’ with daunting ‘fiery hoops’ to get through when you go through the D.A. process as prescribed.

    Go figure!

    • With the outrageous costings,drawn out timelines, hoop jumping for minor works & absolutely no feedback from council depts on requirements for DA applications.
      & Having to upgrade our stormwater to properties with retrenction pits in a flood zone while nothing has been done in our area of New Brighton since the estates where development.??
      Disappointed ,disgusted local

  2. If governments local, state and federal think they can beat the residents of Byron shire, they are in for a, well deserved, rude awakening.

  3. Be Afraid, be very afraid!

    Council are misleading and dishonest by calling it a moratorium. Council will not “go easy” on anyone, and once people have self nominated for the moratorium, they will be subject to the same planning and compliance as everyone else.
    The real issue is councils planning and certification departments being so inefficient, arduous, and ridiculously complicated. Its almost impossible to get a new build through council, let alone older buildings that dont meet current regulations: Building Codes of Australia (BCA). BAL Bushfire building codes, Bushfire Access regulations, Septic and waste regulations. These are all big ticket items costing tens of thousands of dollars to upgrade. BSC please advise your “moratorium” strategy as to how residents can get these compliant?????
    The reason we are in such a mess is due to it being so complicated, time consuming expensive and downright stressful, to get a new dwelling approved in the first place! FIRST BSC needs to make planning pathways easier and quicker to navigate, train certification staff to actually work with residents rather than make things painfully difficult at every opportunity, AND have a consistent approach between their media department, strategy, councillors, planning, certification and compliance. Once BSC can sort itself out, then maybe they can start bringing the community to account.
    One classic example of the stupidity and expense of the current system, and why there are so many illegal dwellings is access. Council requires all dwellings to have a 4m wide driveway access, with a passing bay every 50m and for many hinterland properties with steep driveways these will need to be sealed so a fire truck can access the property. This is at massive expense to the landowner, however, when there is actually a bushfire, the RFS standard position is to EVACUATE and they will not send a fire truck up your expensive driveway to save your property or you. what a joke.
    BSC you need to be honest about this process, and stop calling it a moratorium, leading residents to think there is some easy pathway to compliance.

    BSC, sort out your own failings in your planning, certification and compliance departments before you start causing untold stress, financial hardship and homelessness.

    If your own departments werent so inefficient and complicated and you didnt constantly waste money on legal actions, you would have more money to build safer roads for the ratepayers.

  4. Everything Jacob says is absolutely right – it is plain common sense. Unfortunately, that seems to be in short supply in the Council bunker.

  5. Tweed Council made me demolish an unauthorised dwelling at Crystal Cr. Don’t think for a minute that they won’t send out demolition orders and enforce same.
    Know this. For a council approval , land must be cleared 60 m in all directions. That’s an acre of forest demolished to comply . Just think about that.

  6. a fundamental principle needs to apply – make the legal pathway to development cheaper and easier than the illegal one. Without that, Council’s thought bubble program of eradication is on auto-failure. And if the robo-letters continue, they need to be based on sound research. Don’t just spot a dwelling on satellite view and send an intimidating letter. So many dwellings in Main Arm pre-date the requirement for planning permission and are not “unauthorised”. Council should have checked this before putting the wind up people, who have better things to do (like survive COVID) but now have to hire planners and lawyers and for no reason.

  7. I wonder why people think that they don’t need to comply with planning laws? If it was a developer not complying people would be rightly aggrieved. I am sorry but I fail to see the difference.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Save Wallum now

The Save Wallum campaign has been ongoing and a strong presence of concerned conservationists are on site at Brunswick Heads. How the state planning...

Can Council’s overturn their decisions?

NSW Labor planning minister, Paul Scully, when asked about the Wallum estate by local MP Tamara Smith (Greens)  in parliament on March 20, said,...

The bridges of Ballina Council

Ballina Shire Council has started preliminary investigation works at Fishery Creek Bridge, on River Street, and Canal Bridge, on Tamarind Drive, as part of their plan to duplicate both bridges.

Tweed Council wants your ideas on future sports facilities

Tweed Council is looking for feedback from residents about future plans for sport and recreation in the area.