I was interested in your article ‘Former Mullum hospital site Q&A (Echo, 17 January). I thank you for this article, and for drawing attention to several issues that will affect the local residents. In particular, I refer to your inclusion quoted below:
‘Council also proposes to increase the height of buildings allowed on the site from nine metres to 11.5 metres. Negotiations are underway with neighbouring property owners to also increase the height limit allowable on their sites.’
I find this of particular interest because any changes to height limits of neighbouring properties seems to pre-empt any decisions yet to be reached regarding Council’s response to the NSW Department of Planning strategy for housing densification in Mullumbimby, as recently outlined in their Housing Options Paper – Draft for Public Exhibition.
I attended a community forum at Council chambers in Mullum prior to the end of the period for formal public feedback regarding the Housing Options Paper for the Byron Shire. As a landowner potentially affected by the policy changes outlined, I was particularly interested in the proposal that a tract of housing blocks along Left Bank Road, beginning adjacent to and also opposite the former hospital site be subject to ‘Potential Urban Conversion’, ie. having their zoning changed from R5 (large lot residential) to R2 (low density residential).
This change aroused my interest because it seemed from my investigations, it was the one and only area within the entire Shire that had been earmarked for Potential Urban Conversion. I asked a question at the meeting regarding this apparently singular application of proposed re-zoning and was told by the lady Council employee that (as memory serves me), yes it was an only occurrence, and its inclusion in the Draft Strategy has been kicked off by a suggestion from a landowner adjacent to (or nearby) the hospital site.
This leads me to question who this particular landowner is, and how it is that Council is already in negotiations with them for changes to their building height restrictions, prior to changes to the Local Environment Plan (LEP) that might ensue from the Housing Options Draft Paper submission to NSW Department of Planning. It also makes me wonder how a landowner might hold such sway in suggesting proposed zoning changes.
I would appreciate any feedback you might be able to bring on this apparent anomaly to supposed procedure.
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. 
