Green light for motel rooftop alcohol sales

By Tim Howard

The objections of neighbours of a controversial motel development in Yamba have been overruled by a vote of Clarence Valley Council.

The owners of the motel at 2 Queen St Yamba put in proposal to modify its development consent to allow limited sales of alcohol from its rooftop.

Previously the owners had been restricted to allowing BYO alcohol consumption on the motel roof until 10pm.

The proposal, agreed to at the council meeting, allows alcohol sales on the rooftop from 4pm to 6pm on Wednesdays, Fridays and Saturdays.

The proposal drew 17 submissions from the public, all against it.

Other businesses and residents believed it would create a noise problem for them and their patrons and would be hard to police effectively.

Others claimed restrictions on nonpatrons drinking on the roof had been broken and others feared it opened the door for large-scale functions such as weddings with 100 plus in attendance.

Others pointed out a similar request during the DA stage had been refused and nothing had changed to warrant the backfip.

Cr Ian Tiley lightheartedly questioned how it would be possible to police the conditions in the modifcation.

“How the devil would we be able to effectively police a condition like this,” he said. “You’re gonna have to be there all night when they fall off the roof. Will the ranger need to take a drink with him?”

Three councillors, Jeff Smith, Debrah Novak and Greg Clancy were concerned enough from the submissions to vote against the proposal, but the other six were not convinced.

Cr Smith actually called the item so he could move it and vote against it.

“I’ve actually lived near one of these places 20 years ago, (and there were) all sorts of dramas,” he said.

“The recommendation admittedly is quite restrictive and good on them.

“I see issues potentially down the track. And as I said, just to acknowledge those 17 submissions against I’ll be voting against this motion.”

Cr Steve Pickering was initially in Cr Smith’s camp, but when he saw the details of the proposal, he changed his mind.

“We have to vote on what’s been presented to us today,” he said. “And the modifcation is to allow the sale of alcohol for two hours between 4pm and 6pm, three afternoons per week being Wednesday, I think Saturday or Friday or Saturday and Sunday, two weekends and a weekday.”

Cr Pickering said the zoning of the precinct persuaded him approval was the right way forward

“To allow the sale of alcohol in the afternoon, three days a week, isn’t a big ask, especially when the area is zoned a tourist tourism that’s not a residential zoned it is tourism zoned,” he said.

Cr Debrah Novak said the council had experience from making changes to consent conditions in Yamba’s

CBD, that should make it cautious.

“It’s all very well to be able to put consent conditions in, but to enforce it is going to be the diffcult part and I believe that by you know when this frst came to council, it came as a motel it didn’t come as a hotel,” she said.

“My understanding to the facility doesn’t have food on site either. So they bring food in for guests.

“So for me, it just it’s a headache waiting to happen, so I won’t be supporting it at all.”

Cr Karen Toms was scathing of the objections to the development, saying they opened the council to a hearing in the Land and Environment Court.

“Wow. I’m quite fabbergasted by some of the arguments against this development modifcation” she said.

“Clearly they’re taking no notice at all of the EP and A Act. The power to modify a development consent is provided under Section 4.55 of the Environment Planning and Assessment Act.

That’s the legislation that our planners have to assess this on.”

She took aim at some of the issues other councillors raised.

“To hear Cr Smith saying no because of an experience he had 20 years ago is extraordinary,” Cr Toms said.

“I just can’t understand how you could use that and actually say that in a chamber as a reason for not supporting something that is clearly the offcers recommendation and they’re the experts.”

She also took aim at Cr Novak’s claims council had been by other decisions to change consents in the CBD.

“It surprises me that Cr Novak brings up another business in Yamba and the issues about that and talks about it being a nightmare when it has nothing to do with it,” she said.

“That’s a noise issue and we need to ensure so that’s why can’t the applicant earn a little bit of money out of that, a few hours every week.”

In his right of reply

Cr Smith expressed surprise at council’s willingness to dismiss lived experience in these matters.

“Yes, it’s true you can’t beat lived experience but let’s just put that aside,” he said.

“Yeah, there is there is drinking going on up there till 10 o’clock and as you can see by some of those submissions, if you’ve read them that it kicks on until 11 o’clock, there’s noise, there’s all sorts of drama that has been raised here.” that when we make decisions, we don’t use other things.”

But Cr Clancy was not convinced the council should be so cowered by the threat of court action it became a rubber stamp for developers.

“We are the councillors who have to decide on this we take advice from the staff and the staff that their job in a professional manner,” he said.

“And even if modifcation is allowed under the Act, which it is, that doesn’t mean that we have to automatically rubber stamp everything that comes through.”

Cr Alison Whaites was more convinced by the economic arguments behind allowing the consent modifcation.

“For those two hours this business can be making money,” she said. “So they’re only drinking. I don’t understand what the difference is they’re only drinking alcohol.

“They could be partying and yahooing whatever they’re doing

Cr Toms raised a point of order saying it was not permitted to use matters raised in submissions in debate, but Mayor Peter Johnstone overruled her.

Cr Smith said there were already issues and this modifcation did nothing to stop them, but might make it worse and put pressure on enforcement agencies like rangers and the police, whose resources were already stretched.

“It’d be lovely sitting up on top of the roof there overlooking the park and the Pacifc Ocean, the cenotaph, there. Top spot,” he said.

“That said, like it’s already going on. And there’s already problems.

“It comes back to are we just creating another drama that we’ve got our rangers or police or neighbours that have gotta keep keep complaining about.

“It’s already going on? It’s just another drama that’s unnecessary in my opinion.”

Councillors voted 6-3 for the consent modifcation with Crs Smith, Clancy and Novak against.