The application was ‘bordering on the ridiculous’ according to one Byron councillor.
Coming before last week’s Byron Council meeting was a development application (DA) seeking retrospective approval for a shed on a property on Hamiltons Lane, Byron Bay.
Permission for the shed had been granted back in 2017 but the building that was actually built was not the same as the approved DA.
Seems normal enough, right? Particularly in a Shire where people frequently build first and seek permission later.
The only difference was that the building at Hamiltons Lane appeared not to be a shed at all. Unless sheds these days typically include ‘a master bedroom with exquisite views’.
The building in fact appears to be a large dwelling.
‘It has two internal levels and generous outdoor decks at each level,’ Council staff said in a report that questioned the applications ‘bona fides’.
‘It has a floor space of approximately 360sqm with a significant internal second floor mezzanine…’
Then there’s the real estate advertisement that the former owners of the property posted when they put it up for sale.
Read out to the Council meeting by a neighbour, the advertisement described the shed as a ‘detached, dual occupancy’ that is ‘pending approval’.
‘The building has all plumbing in place, polished flooring, custom bi-folds, designed to have the master bedroom upstairs to enjoy the exquisite views,’ the advertisement reportedly said.
To be fair, the new owners of the property have promised to remove the internal walls and partitions to remove the rooms created, thus ‘confirming the use of the building as a shed’.
They even included architectural drawings which show a picture of the building with a tractor and a quad bike in it.
But the councillors in attendance at last week’s meeting remained unconvinced. Perhaps it was because this was the third time various owners of the property have applied for retrospective planning approval in relation to the shed over the past six years.
Or perhaps it was because the building also breaches planning controls both in terms of height and building envelope.
Whatever their specific thinking, councillors voted unanimously to reject the application, leaving the new owners facing the prospect of having to demolish their ‘shed’ completely.
‘This is bordering on ridiculous that it’s gotten as far as it has. I can’t for the life of me see how these sorts of things don’t happen automatically. There’s no substance to this whatsoever,’ Independent Councillor, Alan Hunter said.
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. 
