In 2020 then Greens Mayor Simon Richardson used his casting vote to facilitate the rezoning of flood-prone, environmentally constrained and sensitive coastal land at the former Club Med site at 144 Bayshore Drive, Byron Bay, now Elements of Byron resort.
This was strongly opposed by now Greens Mayor Sarah Ndiaye and independent councillor Cate Coorey at the time.
Richardson told the 2020 Byron Shire Council (BSC) meeting that he supported the proposal to rezone the on the basis that, ‘From an environmental point of view, short of doing nothing, which isn’t going to happen; having nine residences with no ability to have any more, no ability for tourism, and with protections for the most environmentally sensitive areas, is the best outcome we’re going to get.’
Image from DA
Rezoned for nine dwelling entitlements
The site was re-zoned for a potential nine housing entitlements in 2021 with Elements of Byron resort’s Development Director Jeremy Holmes at the time telling The Echo, ‘The proposed allotments would be a minimum of one hectare, providing ample space for a single dwelling to be located in cleared grassed areas only. The E4 zone would permit dwelling houses but not secondary dwellings or dual occupancy, so there could never be more than nine houses.’
At the most recent BSC meeting (18 June), Mr Holmes spoke in favour of a development application (DA 10.2025.275.1) that was proposing a community title subdivision.
The DA, which was approved with conditions, proposed subdividing three of the four C4
Environmental Living lots into five C4 lots, each with its own dwelling entitlement and two additional lots without a dwelling entitlement. Thereby creating an additional two dwelling entitlements.
The additional two lots were proposed to be a community lot that has no dwelling entitlement, and the beach access formalised as a separate lot.
That means that four housing entitlements have become six housing entitlements in the rezoned area.
Flood-prone site
Key concerns throughout the zoning, rezoning, and DAs to develop the site have been the environmental sensitivity of the site, its position in the coastal hazard zone, and the issue of flooding.
Seeming amnesia regarding the history of the site was clear in the Council debate as Cr Ndiaye spoke against the DA and independent Cr Michael Lyon in favour.
This ‘is private property, they have every right to want to develop it in the way that they want to,’ said Cr Lyon.
Cr Lyon seemed to forget that this was a DA increasing three lots to seven with potential for more housing entitlements on another block of land to the north west, telling the meeting that, ‘it’s pretty light [development] under that zoning compared to what could be put forward. I think it was originally going to be nine, so we’re down to five, and I just don’t think it’s appropriate to vote against something just because you don’t like it, you need to have valid grounds.’
Elements Resort clarified with The Echo that the original rezoning had the potential for nine housing entitlements.
‘There remains the potential to subdivide the residual lot to the north west, with a landholding of around 30 hectares, to yield up to two additional dwelling entitlements,’ an Elements of Byron resort spokesperson told The Echo.
‘Should that occur, there would then be eight dwelling entitlements, across eight lots, across the subject land.’
Wild fox chase
In the meantime, independent Cr David Warth got distracted by fencing for foxes until Cr Michelle Lowe (Greens) pointed out that if you are putting up fencing to keep foxes in or out of an area, you are also restricting the movement of native wildlife like wallabies and echidnas. So that idea was finally dropped.
The site is in the coastal hazard zone, which BSC is in the process of reviewing to develop a Coastal Management Plan, with some submissions stating that approving further development in that zone is premature.
Previously a ‘no development’ zone
The 2015 Belongil Floodplain Management Plan (BFMP) identified the land as being in the ‘no development’ flood zone. However, the developers stated that their review of the hydraulic categorisation of the Belongil Creek Floodplain Risk Management Study and Plan (2015) in September 2021, ‘considered the site low hazard’ and therefore ‘potentially suitable for development’.
During the 18 June Council debate on approving the CT, Cr Ndiaye showed photos of the flooded site from 30 March 2022 (a month after the February flood). There were also photos from 2005 in submissions against the DA that demonstrated that the site floods.
‘This is exactly the place that we are making decisions about putting housing,’ she told the meeting.
Who is ‘pulling heart strings’?
Cr Ndiaye then pointed out that councillors know that flooding happens at this site, that there is a risk of coastal erosion, and sea level rise, as well as a legal risk if Council approves development in a known flood zone.
‘I can’t in good conscience support something that we know floods to that level. That water is 30 centimetres deep at the edge, but that land slopes downwards towards those ponds, so it’s like waist-deep in areas. Having seen what happened in the 2022 floods to people, and having watched huge amounts of our coastline just get eroded overnight, I can’t in good conscience support this development,’ she said, proposing to refuse the DA.
Councillor Jack Dods then called out Cr Ndiaye’s use of a photograph of the site when it was flooded as ‘pulling at heart strings’ saying that she was ‘using very emotive images’ and pointing out that there were many places in the Byron Shire where you could have taken a photo of a flooded area.
Independent Cr Dods then went on to talk about his mum having marched against Club Med and told the chamber that, ‘I think most of those protesters probably would have said, yeah, you know what, that’s not perfect, that’s a trade-off I can accept.’
Previous agreement to revegetate the site
The protestors though may have been more willing to accept the trade-off approved by the state government with the developer Becton in the 2000s that allowed for ‘a revegetated former golf course’ as reported in The Echo on 30 November, 2010.
Following Brian and Peggy Flannery’s purchase of the site via their family company Ganra Pty Ltd in 2010 they were able to bypass the Becton DA by submitting an amendment to an older 1987 resort approval rather than adopting the state-backed 2006 Becton master plan that would have seen the current site revegetated.
During the debate, Greens Cr Elia Hauge went from seconding the motion to refuse the DA to voting in favour of the DA. Hauge’s was the decisive vote to ensure the development was approved.
‘I initially spoke against the proposal, but Cr Dods made a very valid point in his closing statement about applying our planning instruments consistently – something I had argued very strongly for in the agenda item beforehand, which looked at a residential DA in a coastal hazard zone,’ she told The Echo following the meeting.
‘Ultimately, while this site is flood-prone, the proposal is in line with our planning instruments. This is a problem with our planning instruments, not the individual proposal, and one that I will continue to push persistently to fix through our flood risk studies and plans.’
Crs Lyon, Hauge (Greens), Dods, Warth, and Janet Swain (Labor) voted in favour of the motion with Crs Delta Kay (Greens), Lowe (Greens), Ndiaye (Greens), and Peter Doherty (Labor) voting against the motion.
The DA also ties a ‘7000m2 lot to the east of the public beach access to become part of Elements of Byron resort,’ a spokesperson told The Echo.
‘The northern section to the right of the beach access would become public parkland, providing a new green space for community. The approved DA includes commitments to revegetate this land.’
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. 
