Ballina Council has approved a three-storey, $20m accommodation development in Lennox Head, despite the fact that the proposal breaches floor space, height, and set-back limits.
In the latest in a series of plus-sized developments in the town, Ballina’s councillors unanimously approved the ‘Surf Lodge’ project at its Ordinary Meeting on October 24.
The development, located at 52 and 54 Ballina Street, will see two old beach bungalows demolished and replaced with a 35-room accommodation building, accompanied by a swimming pool, bar, and restaurant.
Beneath the structure will be a two-level basement carpark for 86 cars, 36 of which are surplus to the requirements of the accommodation operation.
The developer, Graham Dunn’s Annloz Pty Ltd, sought and was granted permission to exceed the regulations in terms of height, floor space ratios and building set-backs.
61.5 per cent FSR exceedance
The biggest exceedance was for floor space ratio (FSR), with the development going 61.5 per cent above the limit for the Lennox Head town centre.
The developer attributed this variation, in part, to the 36 surplus car parking spaces in the basement and ‘a portion of the built form located above ground floor level’.
They also argued that the development was ‘reflective of the built form anticipated in the E1 local centre zone and the Lennox Head village centre’ which was ‘an area undergoing transition’.
They further claimed that the floor space variation did not contribute to adverse bulk and scale impacts within the village centre and the development overall was consistent with the character of this area.
The application also successfully sought a 7.2 per cent variation of the height limit for the town, meaning that the structure will stand at 9.65m.
This exceedance relates to the lift overrun and three areas in the western portion of the building.
The applicant’s justification for the variation was that it was necessary to achieve ‘an architecturally-designed three-storey building that is of a scale consistent with other commercial and mixed-use developments approved within the Lennox Head village centre’ and also that any overshadowing, overlooking and loss of views with be avoided because of the site’s corner location.
The developer further argued that the development would not materially change the village centre streetscape. This argument was accepted by both Council staff and councillors, with no significant conditions or limitations placed on the development.
In the public interest
Rather, they found that was both permissible and ‘in the public interest’.
‘The proposed development is permissible in the E1 Local Centre zone and aligns with the objectives the DCP including those specifically relating to Precinct A of the Lennox Head Village,’ Council staff said.
Residents appear to have been divided over the proposal, with 19 of the 30 community submissions in favour, and 11 against.
Key issues raised in objection included traffic, construction and amenity impacts, including overshadowing and the scale of the development.
Those in favour argued that the development provided Lennox with much-needed tourist accommodation and that the design of the building tied in well with the upgraded village centre.
They also asserted that the development would be of benefit to local small business owners.
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. 
