Local architect David Brown has resigned from Council’s Affordable Housing Committee, and the Place Planning Collective (PPC).
The PPC is a body of locals tasked with guiding Council with the development of Bangalow, Mullum, the Arts & Industry Estate and Federal.
Among his many reasons for resigning, he says Council’s Byron Shire Affordable Housing Contribution Policy is ‘fundamentally flawed’.
So what is it?
Both the ‘policy and scheme’ are available on Council’s website.
Council say: ‘One of our initiatives to help deliver affordable housing for our community is to collect contributions from landowners when their land is upzoned’.
‘The Byron Shire Affordable Housing Contribution Policy sets out how landowners can make an affordable housing contribution using a planning agreement. The Affordable Housing Contribution Procedure provides more detail about how we operate the contribution framework. The other pathway we have for collecting contributions is through the Affordable Housing Contributions Scheme.’
The Affordable Housing Contribution Scheme, prepared by Judith Stubbs and Associates, was adopted by Council on August 11, 2022, and Byron Council is the only regional council to have one.
What’s identified?
A viability assessment (Appendix B at Page 55) looks at sites in Byron Bay (one 1.8 ha parcel), Bangalow (9.7 ha), while Mullumbimby takes up a considerable amount of land at 62.4 ha.
As for the Byron land, a small parcel is located on the corner of Ewingsdale Road and Kendall Street at Belongil.
Brown told The Echo, ‘The Byron Bay land was noted as flood-prone, and likely to require two metres of fill. And we know all that does is exacerbate flooding elsewhere.’
As for the Bangalow land, Brown says it ‘is generally flood free.’
‘The Bangalow land is shown as possible land for residential in the Byron Shire Residential Strategy, and is probably okay for development’.
Yet Brown raises concerns over the Mullumbimby map, which he compared with flood study maps.
Mr Brown says the map suggests that ‘all but 11.4 ha of the stated 62.4 ha is potenially flood free, or not captured by DPI farmland protection recommendations.’
‘So, from a total 73.9 ha stated in the policy, just 21.1 ha (Bangalow at 9.7 ha and Mullumbimby at 11.4 ha) might be flood-free, and suitable for development.
Sharyn French, Manager Environmental and Economic Planning, responded to the claims made by Mr Brown:
1. Mr Brown says of the Mullum land pegged, ‘all but 11.4 ha of the stated 62.4 ha is flood free, or not captured by DPI farmland protection recommendations’. Is this correct and if so, why is Council proposing that this land be developed – was the 2022 flood not included in this policy/scheme?
Ms French: ‘The draft Mullum Residential Strategy has identified some 62 hectares for investigation. The plans were prepared prior to the 2022 flood. This is currently under review and a further update to the strategy will be reported to Council in the second part of 2023.’
2. Are Mr Brown’s density projections reasonable in terms of ‘15 dwellings per hectare, you get a total of about 320 rather than 1,110 dwellings’.
Ms French: ‘Depending on final zonings, the density projections can vary. A low density zoning may result in a yield of 15 dwellings per hectare. A medium density zoning could result in a much higher development yield.’
3. Mr Brown says after all the flood-prone land is taken away from the total land pegged, he estimates 320 dwellings, with 80 affordable housing dwellings (25 per cent), leaving 280 or so that are not. Is that correct?
Ms French: ‘This would depend on how the land is zoned.’
4. Also there is no timeframe for such developments, Mr Brown says. He writes: ‘Rezonings, development approvals and construction could take years! And Council cannot force the issue beyond rezoning the land as, apart from the Mullum Hospital site, private ownerships are involved, and they may choose not play the game until the market starts to rebound’.
Ms French: ‘Once land is rezoned, the future development of the land would be in the hands of the landowner in terms of timing.’
Mr Brown concludes by saying, ‘Then you have Council’s “escape clause” from detailed scrutiny, such as expediting the NRRC rezoning proposal for Bangalow and Saddle Road. “Sorry yer honour, it weren’t me!” might be Council’s response. And the NRRC might choose not to include this land in a contributions scheme.’
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. 
