Jonson Lane developer asks for $200,000 discount on Byron council fees

The boss of a shop top housing project in Byron Bay says he’d be paying thousands less in council fees each week if the project was in a neighbouring shire or even Sydney.

A Byron Bay developer building shop top housing in the North Coast’s most lucrative real estate market says he will pay up to $500,000 in council fees if he can’t get a discount.

JD Property Group director Jason Dunn received Byron Shire Council approval in May 2020 for his company’s mixed use development on the corner of Jonson and Browning Streets.

A subsequent approval was issued for council land in the road reserve to be used for loading and unloading of vehicles during construction, but it has come at a price.

The fees accrued so far for the use of that land have been paid in full to the tune of $193,000.

Works are under way on the site, which will have two buildings comprising three stories including roof top facilities and two levels of basement levels of carparking.

There will be retail space on the ground floor and 28 units.

The council’s staff recommended at a meeting on Thursday that Mr Dunn’s request for fee relief be refused, saying it would “send mixed messages” to developers.

They also cited the “general disruption and inconvenience to the public and the amenity of the neighbourhood” resulting from the use of the road reserve.

Mr Dunn argued the fees were “disproportionate” and far above those in other shires.

He said he had spoken with the local government ombudsman and said local governments were legislated to set reasonable fees and charges.

He asked the council to reduce fees from $9 to $4 per square metre, per day.

He said the current rate had cost his company about $5000 per week in fees.

In the neighbouring Tweed Shire or the Hills Shire in Sydney, he said he would be paying closer to $2000 for the same area.

Mr Dunn said his company had already paid more than $193,000 in fees for use of the land and expected this to be more than $500,000 by the completion of works.

He told councillors he wanted to have that reduced by about $200,000.

“We just want to pay a charge that is fair and reasonable … compared to other councils,” Mr Dunn said.

“These fees are massively disproportionate to other councils.”

When asked by Mayor Michael Lyon whether he was aware of the fees and charges before the development approval and construction certificate were issued, Mr Dunn said he was not.

He said his builder had cited a much lower rate used by Gold Coast City Council.

“We were a little bit taken aback by some of the numbers,” he said.

An artist's impression of the development.

Councillor Alan Hunter wanted to defer the matter until they could obtain more information from the ombudsman.

“It’s not a good look to be charging excessively for anything,” Mr Hunter said.

Council staff said fees and charges were placed on public exhibition and adopted by the council as part of its budget each year.

The council received no opposition to the fee in question during that process this year.

The council’s legal counsel, Ralph James, said because the fees came from a council resolution he didn’t believe the ombudsman or the Office of Local Government could direct the council to change them.

“The decision to adopt the fees and charges has been properly taken after …. consultation,” Mr James said.

“Ultimately, it’s a decision for the elected council as to what the fees and charges are.”

Deputy Mayor Sarah Ndiaye wanted to proceed with caution.

“We don’t want to get in a position where we’re just making willy-nilly decisions on the floor that have implications across our shire,” Ms Ndiaye said.

She wanted to defer the decision as Mr Hunter suggested, but to also ask staff to prepare a report on their fees and charges.

Neither of the motions received majority support, nor did a push by councillor Basil Cameron to knock back the developer’s request outright.

Ultimately not enough councillors could agree on one way to proceed so the matter fell over.

The council’s legal counsel Ralph James said by not resolving on any particular course of action, councillors kept the existing application of fees in place.

Those fees and charges are set each year in council‘s budget process, which is placed on public exhibition with an opportunity for public comment. The elected Council then adopts the fees and changes.

“The developer wanted (the fee) varied and/or refunded,” Mr James said.

He said while the staff recommendation was “firmer” in its wording to not support this application, the lack of a Council resolution one way or the other means that the fees as applied will remain.

“In effect the lack of a resolution means that status quo remains ” Mr James said.

The options available to the developer are to raise the matter with the NSW Ombudsman or the Office of Local Government.