With the ongoing uncertainty, lack of transparency, and botched public relations around Council’s roadworks for the main road into Mullumbimby from Uncle Toms and The Saddle Road, councillors last week unanimously adopted a mayoral minute to outline specific traffic plans and procedures around the project.
It also appears that federal and state funding earmarked for the Mullumbimby Road works was for flood reliance works near Uncle Toms, yet is now being used for general road repairs along the section up to the Mcauleys Lane intersection.
Additionally, the funding amounts differ from those the local MPs announced on May 9, 2024, and what Council’s website says.
When asked why, Council staff told The Echo, ‘For information contained in media releases from the NSW and Australian governments, please contact them directly’.
Three months work
Staff told councillors and the chamber on Thursday the roadworks would now take three months, not five to six, as previously stated.
It is expected to impact approximately 13,000 vehicle movements per day.
In morning access, The Saddle Road residents accused Council staff of removing high conservation value vegetation on their road, including an Endangered Ecological Community.
Matthew O’Reilly told the chamber that procedures should have been followed but weren’t, and it was a ‘complete failure between middle management down to those on the ground’.
Emergency works?
The Echo asked staff if it was correct to say The Saddle Road works were called ‘emergency works’ (under Division 17 of the Transport and Infrastructure SEPP), but will instead facilitate upgrades to allow its use as a detour for the Mullumbimby Road works.
Council staff told The Echo that road vegetation clearing on The Saddle Road ‘has been done as part of funded emergency work in the wake of damage done by Ex-Tropical Cyclone Alfred’.
‘Pruning has been carried out as part of emergency work to remove dangerous limbs on some trees.
‘This was based on assessments from an independent arborist.
‘Claims Council is clearing vegetation as part of the Mullumbimby Road upgrade project are incorrect’, they said.
Blindsided
Resident Kirsty Nugent told the chamber that residents were blindsided with the announcement of a traffic detour past their homes, which was shortly followed by road crews clearing vegetation – without notice.
‘We are still in the dark’, she said, adding that residents were told their road would remain a cul-de-sac.
Staff later told the chamber a meeting with residents is planned, with a date yet to be determined.
Large Myocum DA exhibition unclear
Meanwhile, The Echo has asked Council staff why public exhibition for DA 10.2023.454.1, an exclusive large 38 lot greenfield proposal at 53 Myocum Road, was extended from May 9 to May 19, and then back to May 9.
While the DA is no longer on Council’s website, it is also the subject of botched assessment and advertising.
The DA comes with fierce opposition from neighbours, who have provided a long list of issues around traffic and other areas.
The Echo last week reported that Council planning staff admitted to assisting wealthy developers with their large DA near the Mullumbimby Road and Mcauleys Lane intersection.
Staff claim they approached a separate landowner around land acquisition at the intersection, which would benefit the developers’ proposal, yet also provide improved traffic safety.
Despite the claim, the land acquisition was not required for Council’s own traffic works, they 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. 
