A 35ha Myocum residential rezoning/subdivision proposal, located near the McAuleys Lane and Mullum Road intersection, has some neighbours anxious about the potential for traffic accidents, given the precarious intersection and busy road.
As part of the $60m proposal, Council staff say there will be ‘safety upgrades to part of McAuleys Lane, as well as an upgrade of the McAuleys Lane and Mullumbimby Road intersection’.
53 McAuleys Lane Myocum is located on the crest of the hill coming into the town on the left, and developers propose 33 large residential lots, six neighbourhood/community title lots and one ‘association/community title lot’.
While the Kingscliff-based Millner Group is proposing the development, the planning agreement lists Boreas Group Pty Ltd and Tareeda Developments as the developers, and Mcauleys No1 Pty Ltd as the landowner. All parties are based in Bangalow.
A rezoning proposal, from RU2 Rural Landscape to R5 Large Lot Residential, is on exhibition until October 4 and there are 16 documents on Council’s website related to the proposal, including traffic reports.
According to page 11 of Ardill Payne & Partners’ Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA), they estimate over 12,000 daily vehicle movements on Mullumbimby Road.
By comparison, in 2002, the TIA says there was 6,537 daily vehicle movements.
Resident Kate Constantine told The Echo she and her neighbours discovered that the developer’s offer to pay for traffic safety improvements ‘had been repeatedly rejected by Council staff’ in the pre-DA meetings.
She says, ‘Instead, Council’s traffic plan, amounting to merely “more painted lines on the existing road”, will inevitably lead to a fatal accident, and has missed an opportunity to future-proof an intersection on the major access road to Mullumbimby that will only become busier and more dangerous as the local population increases in line with forecasts’.
Fits within Rural Land Use Strategy
The Echo asked Millner Group’s Tim Mundy, ‘What were the proposals regarding traffic management; What does Council propose instead’, and, ‘When do you expect to lodge a DA?’
Mundy told The Echo, ‘This rezoning has been contemplated for some time, as part of Council’s Rural Land Use Strategy’.
‘Any future DA will have to deal with the intersection and all safety concerns.
‘For clarity though, as part of the rezoning process, the intersection has been the subject of several traffic reports both by Council, us as the proponent, and third party peer review.
‘As part of those reports and reviews, there are solutions that increase the safety of the intersection.
‘This has been determined with the assumption of increased usage of the intersection. These proposals will, of course, be considered by Council and publicly exhibited in the DA phase. All parties are, of course very conscious of the need for safety for all current and future residents, and those travelling to and from Mullum’.
Inadequate traffic plan by Council
Constantine told The Echo, ‘It’s inevitable that flood-free McAuleys Lane will experience more development, which will impact the safety of traffic on the road itself, but my main concern as a mother of two school-aged children, is the safety at the intersection of McAuleys Lane and Mullumbimby Rd, between Mullum and Uncle Toms, when traffic through that intersection increases’.
‘At present, although it’s a 80km/h zone and the road is completely straight, vehicles regularly speed, especially as it’s downhill in each direction to the intersection.
‘There is no visibility of vehicles cresting the hills when exiting from McAuleys Lane. If the development goes ahead, the traffic plan proposed in the DA is completely inadequate to address the current situation, let alone when vehicles from McAuleys Lane increases.
‘Mullumbimby Road has become far busier in the last decade as the population has increased – it’s not safe.
‘The plan Council has required in the DA is not sufficient, and lacks foresight.
‘While Council claims there have been no deaths so far, that does not make the intersection “safe” – and the chances of a terrible accident as a result of Council’s decision will only increase if this DA is approved with this inadequate traffic plan’.
Council staff were contacted in relation to this story and say they will reply next week.
A development for much needed housing in the shire .
The nimbys , naturally , oppose it .
Now for the dark Greens who oppose everything to arrive on the scene.
So council staff repeatedly rejected the developers offer to pay for traffic upgrades… Where is the logic in this?
byron shire is going backwards fast; there are better services, infrastructure and innovation for housing and recreation in third world countries.
its the epicentre of NIMBYISM, un-scientific debates and camouflaged green conservatism, where people are protecting their land values, illegal rental incomes and ‘way of life’.
There are some great people in this community, however there are a lot of people holding it back for selfish reasons.