Hundreds of Byron locals are rallying together in a bid to save a large pocket of ecologically significant bushland in Brunswick Heads from development.
The 30-hectare site at 15 Torakina Road, next to the Bayside housing estate, is home to scores of native trees and flowers, which provide food and shelter to koalas, black cockatoos, gliders and the ‘vulnerable’ Wallum Froglet.
However, the site has been approved for a major housing development, called ‘Wallum’, featuring 124 residential lots, three medium density lots and a series of roads and supporting infrastructure.
With public consultation for the development taking place during the worst of the covid pandemic, many locals feel that they were denied the right to have their say.
They are now demanding that the decision to approve the development, made by the Northern Regional Planning Panel (NRPP) in May this year, be reversed.
‘Wallum wildflowers and the intricately-linked wallum froglet habitat are rare, and cannot be re-made or replanted successfully by humans, and deserve unreserved protection in our Shire,’ said James Barrie, one of the leaders of the community campaign.
‘These treasures simply can’t be forfeited to a luxury housing development by Clarence Property Group, to be tastelessly called “Wallum”, after the name of the ecology it will destroy.
‘These plans pose real risk to the local survival of the wallum froglet, and put serious pressure upon its “vulnerable” to extinction conservation status. It cannot survive through seasonal climatic fluctuations corralled into a human-modified habitat.’
In it’s Development Application, Clarence Property says that over 18 hectares, or 60 per cent of the site, will be retained and enhanced as conservation zones.
The developer says that ‘extensive planting’ will be done in compensation for the loss of native flora on the site, including black she oaks and scribbly gums.
It says that this will effectively negate any impact on native species, including the Wallum Froglet.
The NRPP agreed, stating that ‘the biodiversity impacts of the proposed development have been satisfactorily assessed … and conservation measures to offset the residual impact of the proposed development on biodiversity values … have been secured into the future.’
Byron Council also supported the application, though it did not make the final decision.
But the hundreds locals opposed to the development disagree, arguing that the homes for vulnerable species cannot simply be replaced with freshly planted trees in another area.
‘The ecological offsets detailed in the “landscape plan” come up seriously short and are grossly inaccurate in claims of preserving the ecology on the ground,’ said Mr Barrie, who has a degree in Environmental Science.
‘This kind of offset green-washing is just not good enough in 2023. What it has on site currently is perfect and precious and deserving of genuine protection.
‘Once wallum ecology and old growth Scribbly Gums are gone or encroached upon too closely by development, there’s simply no remaking it.’
The fight to save the site from development is unlikely to be easy, with the Northern Regional Planning Panel less susceptible to community campaigns than local councils.
Furthermore, the Planning Minister granted concept approval for the subdivision back in July 2013, effectively giving a conditional green light to development on the site.
Clarence Property Group asserts in its development application that it undertook all required community consultation, including conducting an community meeting in mid 2021 which was attended by 40 locals, a letter box drop of more than 200 residents, and a survey of around 20 people.
However, many in the community feel that undertaking this consultation process during the worst periods of the covid pandemic, including lock downs, meant that the wider community was locked out of the process.
Hundreds have taken to social media to demand that the approval of the development be overturned, including 1,240 people who have joined the Save the Bruns Scribbly Gums Facebook group.
In a post on the Save the Bruns Scribbly G8ms Facebook page, Mayor Michael Lyon said there ‘appeared to be no legal avenues to fight this’.
‘Therefore, I have asked for a meeting with the owner to discuss what other options may exist to enable some or all of the trees to be retained,’ Cr Lyon said.
‘That meeting will occur in the next few days. One option may be to allow trees which form part of blocks that have been sold off the plan to remain and at least give the new owners of the smaller lots the option of retaining the tree/s.
‘A couple of the older, grander Scribblys are at the very start of the development footprint where the current road ends, and sit within the 3 medium density lots, that as I understand it are yet to have been sold. I will discuss with the owner what potential may exist for these lots to be reconfigured and/or to retain the trees.’
This is disgraceful, all our natural areas and precious wildlife are disappearing and it just keeps happening. We will be left with nothing but ugly housing developments everything like Helensvale. Come on Northern Rivers, we need to save our natural areas.
This is an horrendous example of how broken nature laws are in this country. It’s “death by a thousand cuts” and the reason why we are in the midst of an extinction crisis.
Hopefully there are grounds for this to be referred to Minister Plibersek as the site contains species and habitats that are Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES). From all of the documents available outlining how the DA was approved, the consultants contracted by the developer grossly underestimated the ecological values of the property, as well as the species that reside there. This onus on the proponent to “do the right thing” is a farce. Pro-development, pro-industry at all costs. The cost in terms of properties like these is too high. We should all be fighting against this!
Strange way of reporting…. wallum froglet is correctly described as “vulnerable” reflecting its’ listing under both the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act & Commonwealth Environment Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act (& previously under the now-repealed NSW TSC Act). Yet no mention of status of either glossy black cockatoos (also Vulnerable in NSW & federally under the EPBC Act ), nor koalas (listed as Endangered under both NSW & Commonwealth legislation).
Need to build on useless farmland not cut down trees of endangered species of flora and fauna no more development on the the east coast anywhere other than old farmland that doesn’t need fill or trees cut down. That’s responsible of course we wouldn’t need new housing if we got rid of air band bs and negative gearing we’d have thousands of houses on the market. Alan Mosley Yamba
Stop the Nature SlaughterFest
There are three MO/CT developments on Federal Drive. Another one is on Exhibition. They are all within a one to two km stretch of road. They form an almost continuous stretch of housing development along a magnificent scenic landscape. I note that BSC approves all DA applications for MO and CT and unconditionally dismisses all submissions opposing the developments however well researched and valid they may be. Councils position is that if the development are described as suitable in the LEP 2014 they will proceed. However 2014 is not 2023. Neighbouring property owners rights are subjugated to those of the developer. As Council is not able to monitor consent conditions and developers successfully seek amendments following consent the developers are in effect left to do whatever they wish. The LEP will show what is to come and where it will end. Other Councils have ceased to approve such developments because they merely provide homes for the wealthy. Goodbye natural environment.
NIMBYism maybe?
Just another example of people trying to hang onto expensive realestate, there’s a housings crisis going on they should be building thousands of houses in this area to ease the cost and affordability so that locals have jobs, affordability of accommodation and business can attract good staff instead of burnouts wake up to yourselves this area is not just for the privileged few
Building on “expensive” coastal real estate will just ensure housing for the “privileged few”. There’s no way it will be affordable in any sense of the term and thus won’t address the housing crisis we’re experiencing here.
*slow clap*
The other comments have said it perfectly. There’s so much empty real estate with Airbnb and heaps of already razed land (farms) that are going bankrupt anyway thanks to globalisation and monopolies from mega corps. Use those.
Also, we need to seriously fix the standards of housing with the weather becoming more and more extreme. No more shoddy shitty buildings that start falling apart in 10-20 years. Better, more efficiently sealed homes that actually save power and resources. More firm laws on quality of materials and workmanship. More eco friendly designs.
Lastly, we need to seriously ban companies and overseas investors from being allowed to buy property. They just buy massive trenches and then subdivide and build Southern Brisbane suburbia clones then sell for thousands of percent profit. Meanwhile this just jacks up the value of property as desperate new families and locals try to stay where they were born and bred.
Cmon. Let’s start making real laws that protect PEOPLE and in this case, our wildlife and biodiversity that is the whole goddamn reason this area is so loved and desired.
“Man, do not pride yourself on your superiority to the animals, for they are without sin, while you, with all your greatness, you defile the earth wherever you appear and leave an ignoble trail behind you — and that is true, alas, for almost every one of us!”
Fyodor Dostoyevsky