BYRON SHIRE Council candidate Ian Cohen has an easy way to solve the Shire’s high rise building issues.
Mr Cohen says that if a majority of Councillors adhere to Council’s Local Environment plan (LEP), questions about high rise variations can never arise.
“Councillors are displaying a clear lack of resolve in edging Byron Shire onto a path which embraces high rise,” he said this week.
“We can prevent this creeping upwards-expansion very easily – stick rigidly to Byron Shire’s LEP.”
Mr Cohen says if a majority of Councillors commit to never breaching the LEP when determining Development Applications (DAs) they’ll send a strong message to people seeking to “bend the rules” when it comes to building heights in Byron Shire.
“It would constitute a powerful defence if any developer took action against Council in the Land and Environment court,” he says.
“Our existing LEP Zonings – their height and other limits – reflect what the people of Byron Shire want.
“They should never be flouted to meet the desires of developers and the NSW Government.”
Height Limit First Moved by then-Councellor Watterson in 1982
Byron Shire’s first development height limit was successfully moved by former Councillor Mike Watterson in early 1982.
“Being a Councillor in Australia’s first ever Green Council taught me the importance of the environment, and of keeping Byron Bay unique – not a clone of the Gold Coast,” the former Councillor Watterson said this week.
“I thought setting the Shire building height limit in our LEP would take care of that.
“But it looks to me like someone’s using a bit of trickery to get round the limits of my original height proposal.”
Cohen Solution
Ian Cohen summarised his position on high rise development by saying the current NSW State Government tactic of adding a 10% variation to the Shire’s existing 9 metre building height limit is a sneaky way to insert the thin edge of the wedge, regarding building height limits.
“I am certainly not against creative development, but I abhor the developer-led ‘creeping’ high rise for our Shire.
“We can lobby the State Government to either rescind the 10% variation clause or change it to 8 metres with a 10% variant.”
“Put simply, I call on all successful Council candidates to promise not to approve DAs beyond our existing LEP’s limits.
“I am confident this would most accurately reflect the will of the people who call Byron Shire their home, and the views of our discerning tourists,” he said.
I agree totally.
How quickly time passes – it now being 40 years since i had my height limit proposal adopted by BSC – at the time the catch cry being – we don’t want another Gold Coast !
Agreed and I hope this height limit stays in place for Byron Bay as it would be a great tragedy to loose the town to Gold Coast style development, it is a ongoing battle, let’s stay vigilant
Thanks Ian … Byron must brace itself for the “ vision” developers have in mind for our little coastal town 🙄 I think you’re right.. it’s all about strict compliance but that’s when they start taking BSC to NSW courts !
I am totally committed to maintaining height limits in our Shire. It is what our community wants.
If it was as simple as you say Ian, I would be once again manning the barricades with you!
You seem to be proposing that Council reject every single DA that in any way may exceed the limits set out in the Shire’s LEP and Development Control Plan?
If so your solution shows a failure to understand that over-riding State legislation – Clause 4.6 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1997 -provides Courts with the ability to permit height and floor space ratio variations. And Courts regularly do so.
Unfortunately the effect would be endless successful appeals and a massive legal bill for ratepayers.
As the legislation applies to every Local Government area in the Byron Shire has Buckley’s of having the State remove it.
Why mislead us into thinking it a solution?
What can be done is to better evaluate such DA’s and make it clear that Council will challenge those on which we could succeed.
We may lose some battles and on occasions risk legal costs but a message will be sent that our community is not a soft touch and will fight to maintain our character.
I couldn’t agree more, the variant consented to by BSC on the Woolies complex started the ball rolling for other developers to use the precedent set by this development. The BSC must work within the LEP. By not doing so they leave themselves open to corruption claims.
I must say though Ian that I am not a Greens supporter as too many of their claims are misinformed, if they would stick to the proven facts it would be alright. By saying this I don’t wish to get into a debate on this.