A Lot of Trouble: What 124 Residential Lots Really Cost
What are we losing — and who’s paying the price?
Developers love to talk about affordability, lifestyle, and “eco-living.” But when you scratch beneath the surface of the Bayside Brunswick Heads project (formerly branded Wallum — the very coastal ecosystem it plans to erase), the real costs become painfully clear.
This isn’t just 124 residential lots. It’s 124 reasons to ask:
What are we losing — and who’s paying the price?
🐨 Species in Decline
The development site is home to more than 100 threatened species, including the Wallum Sedge Frog, Long-nosed Potoroo, Glossy Black Cockatoo, and the now endangered Koala. These species rely on the coastal wallum ecosystem— a mosaic of wildflowers, perched wetlands, scribbly gum woodlands and sedgelands — that cannot be recreated elsewhere.
Once bulldozed, their fragile habitat is gone forever. No landscaping or “green space” will bring it back.
🕸️ Loss of Wildlife Corridors
Wallum isn't just a patch of coastal bushland — it’s a vital wildlife corridor that connects fragmented ecosystems across the Northern Rivers. Development here will cut off animal movement routes, isolate populations, and drive endangered species further toward extinction.
The irony? Developers call this “eco-living.” There’s nothing ecological about fragmentation.
🌧️ A Flood of Risks
This land is mapped as flood-prone, bushfire-prone, and riddled with acid sulfate soils. Building homes here isn’t just irresponsible — it’s dangerous. We’re not just risking biodiversity collapse; we’re risking community safety.
🪶 Cultural Erasure
This is Bundjalung Country. Yet no comprehensive, current First Nations cultural heritage assessment has been carried out for the site — a glaring omission in a process that has failed to meaningfully consult Traditional Custodians with the predominantly desktop study in 2010 failing to consult many of the local indigenous custodians, with half a day of site assessment where only some areas were visted.
The cost here isn’t just environmental — it’s cultural.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
So when developers sell “124 new homes in a connected community,” what they’re really selling is:
Severed wildlife corridors
Endangered habitats
Increased flood risk
Indigenous disconnection from Country
And they’re calling it sustainable.
This isn’t eco-living. It’s eco-leaving — leaving behind responsibility, integrity, and irreplaceable natural and cultural heritage.
This land is priceless. The cost of destroying it is too high.