An update on closed-door deals around the controversial Wallum development by Mayor Michael Lyon has been criticised as not providing any commitment, trading one endangered species for another, while also ignoring the input from the Save Wallum group.
Direct action
Locals say they are prepared to take non-violent direct action (NVDA) to save rare heathland in Bayside, Bruns, from urban development. Dozens of protesters blocked three entry points to the proposed estate on Thursday morning as fencing contractors moved in to section off the cul-de-sacs leading into the site.
The mayor used his casting vote to sign off on subdivision works in February, giving Clarence Property the final approval to clear about 60 per cent of the 18-hectare site for 124 residential lots. His supporting councillors were Asren Pugh, Mark Swivel and Alan Hunter.
Approval for the development was authorised by the Northern Regional Planning Panel in May last year, which included panellist Simon Richardson, the former mayor and mentor to Cr Lyon.
This followed concept plan approval from the state government back in 2013 – a plan that many refer to as a ‘zombie DA’, because it sat undeveloped while environmental protection laws evolved around it.
Cr Lyon released his mayoral minute from last week’s Council meeting, which outlined discussions with developer, Clarence Property.
Cr Lyon said he hopes that it will result in better outcomes, such as a smaller footprint, and smaller lot sizes for ‘singles, couples and empty-nesters’.
No development is best outcome
James Barrie, representing Save Wallum, told The Echo, ‘no development at all is the best outcome for the ecological and cultural values of the Wallum site, and I think Council can try a bit harder, and be more inclusive with their methods if a “compromise” is to be considered’.
‘After all the community has been through, and learned from this DA, this can’t be another backroom affair. We have put so much time into educating councillors on the ecological values of Wallum, and this version of compromise doesn’t reflect that it’s been heeded.
‘With NSW Premier Chris Mins just rejecting a development on the basis of flood liability, there’s more to think about here. We have a high-profile blockade, with strong community backing, and the national media taking interest.
‘This is a DA that has not been robust with its processes, and we’re expecting more if any compromise is to be reached’.
Barrie says, ‘This plan was introduced as a surprise mayoral minute, without any notice to the community, or other councillors. As such it appears like the mayor doesn’t want to face any community discussion’.
‘The community would’ve been there at the Council chambers, like we always are, when we have notice.
‘It’s not a good look for democracy on an issue the community is agitated about.
‘This new plan has unfortunately missed the mark, and while we would welcome 20 less tree-sits to have to resource, it appears to be even more damaging to threatened species in the west than the original footprint.
‘It needs some work to address the major fragmentation of two highly significant threatened species’ habitats that would still occur’.
Pointless frog ponds
Ecologist David Milledge was asked for his views by Cr Lyon around the Wallum Froglet Management Plan in the mayoral minute, ‘in order to understand if there were any improvements that could be made to the artificial ponds being proposed’.
Milledge told The Echo artificial frog ponds are ‘pointless’.
‘I don’t consider that what is presented in the mayoral minute is a good outcome, just better than nothing’.
‘However, there’s no indication that the mayor’s negotiations have resulted in any concessions from Clarence Property, who appear to be ignoring the major community opposition to the development and a complete lack of any social licence’.
He added, ‘the development site plan, as approved, will be a disaster for biodiversity’.
Continuing to work positively, says CEO
Clarence Property CEO, Simon Kennedy told The Echo, ‘The mayoral minute is a fair reflection of the discussions to date, noting that any potential change from the existing approval is significant and Clarence Property are continuing to work positively and in good faith with the mayor in relation to feasible options’.
Minimal loss for developer
Mr Barrie adds, ‘The mayoral minute appears to ask for minimal loss from the developer, and maintains maximum loss to threatened species’. If there is any seeking of real ecological outcomes in a negotiation on this site, the development footprint would need to be substantially reduced and intricate input from concerned ecologists and First Nations people needs to be integrated into a compromise.
‘I want to believe the mayor can get back to the drafting board on this and increase the inclusiveness and transparency with the community stakeholders, to reflect the values of Wallum and broker that proudly with the developer, as the community’s current leading representative’.
Looking at West Byron, now “Harvest Estate”, the ongoing protests and legit objections to “Wallum” might at least slow down the development to a point, where it might not be financially attractive.
The very well publicised glaring issues with the “Wallum” site should now be in everyone’s mind (as should be the flooding risk at “Harvest”) and won’t sit well with most aware locals. Which will only leave unsuspecting out-of-towners as possible victims in these development scams.
This: ‘The mayoral minute appears to ask for minimal loss from the developer, and maintains maximum loss to threatened species’.
I am no fan of this development due to the biodiversity impacts, but the gain of 1.8 ha of scribbly gums is hugely significant and should not be understated. This outcome certainly does not maximise biodiversity impacts, it REDUCES them! Mr Barries demands for a seat at the negotiating table are a bit entitled – if Save Wallum were at the table I cant see ANY meaningful progress being made – some of the talk on the Facebook page is magical thinking at its finest – a land swap for the mullum hospital site, an application to list the site as a RAMSAR wetland, a spot rezoning – this is fantasy stuff. I think the revised footprint is a great starting point. Could it be better? Yes, but it may be the best outcome given the law is squarely on the side of Clarence property.
Supposedly the Mimms government has said there is to be no more building on floodplains in NSW . Whether this is only in the Sydney basin because of flooding in Windsor over the last weekend,or all of NSW I’m not sure but if it is then there are a range of developments on the north coast that need to be stopped immediately from Kingscliff to Newcastle there are plenty of fill in land developments in the process or about to start including wallum and west Byron.
Unsupported by whom Hans? I assume you consulted widely before making this statement. And why do you keep pretending this was all down to this Council to block this development?
@Echo, your following statement is incorrect “a ‘zombie DA’, because it sat undeveloped while environmental protection laws evolved around it.” Stage 1A with 12 houses on Torakina and Omega was registered in 2019. The old layout was amended by the new 2023 DA to provide a lot better environmental outcome.
Totally agree John. But the Echo have never been ones to let the facts get in the way of a good story. 🙂
I’ve upset some sensitivities at the Echo again!
Not difficult with one thin skin individual ( who can dish it out , however) in particular, methinks
Decades ago, back in the 1990’s, The Echo was a force to be reckoned. Hard-hitting, but fair and balanced, these articles changed Byron.
They attacked policies and actions BUT did not pursue individual personal attacks. They published the whole story, no inconvenient facts were omitted, and quotes were obtained from all the concerned people involved.
That was then.
Nowadays, sadly, we get articles like this one.
Where to start, OK, let’s try starting with “An update on closed-door deals”
There is NO closed-door deal. no deal at all, it is the starting point of a potential compromise position.
That’s easy to understand BUT doesn’t make a headline, does it?
Then, there is the all-important Map that was included within the minute when Cr Lyon released his mayoral minute from last week’s Council meeting, which outlined discussions with developer, Clarence Property.
Why not?
In fact, there is barely a mention of the Council meeting where this was discussed, other than above. However, a red herring from a previous meeting managed to appear for some reason.
NO BALANCE,
We know that Mr Barrie is not a person of few words, so, is this the reason why The Echo chose to give him 11 ( yep, ELEVEN) paragraphs of quotes but NONE from the THREE Councillors who were at the meeting, Crs Lyon, Swivel and Coorey, at all.
That’s correct, NONE.
How is that for “balance”?
Also omitted was that the update was accepted UNANIMOUSLY by the Councillors .. ALL of them including the GREEN’S Mayor candidate, and leader of their, as described by The Echo, “dream team” of GREENS at the next Election, Cr Sarah Ndiaye.
The Echo could have requested quotes from the 3 who attended this supposed secret meeting OR even a quote from Cr Ndiaye, as to why she supported the Mayor’s minute.
The Echo did not do so.
To see the Echo printing article of such a standard is both sad and disappointing.