ABOVE: In October 2021, residents had an on-water protest against Iron Gates. Photo: Contributed
The Iron Gates subdivision at Evans Head is on Richmond Valley Council’s meeting agenda tomorrow, Tuesday July 19 at 6pm.
Also, up for discussion at the meeting is flood relief for residents, development applications for flood impacted homes, house raising, land rezoning at Swan Bay and more.
Iron Gates though, seems to be the most controversial subject.
The Evans Head Residents for Sustainable Development has organised a Stop Iron Gates rally outside council chambers at 5pm.
The group wants the DA for the subdivision to be rejected by council.
“This will be a peaceful demonstration of our determination and frustration,” organisers said.
The rally participants are keen to let councillors know they oppose the development even though it is the Northern Regional Planning Panel that decides if the DA goes ahead or not.
The DA2015/0096 was lodged with Richmond Valley Council on October 27, 2014, for a residential subdivision at 240 Iron Gates Drive, Evans Head.
The application initially proposed to create 186 lots (comprising of 178 residential lots, three public reserves, two fire trail lots and three residue lots) but before consent could be granted it required the Minister to adopt a Master Plan, under the State Environmental Planning Policy No. 71 – Coastal Protection.
In the seven and a half years since the first submission, the Iron Gates development application has changed many times.
On a date to be announced, panel will consider the subdivision of land to create 147 lots including 135 residential lots, four public reserves and one sewer pump station lot and one drainage reserve lot, three ‘super lots’, one residue lot and two rainforest lots.
The Iron Gates application has been publicly exhibited five times (in 2014, 2015, 2019, 2021 and 2022), and the following submission numbers were received:
▪ 656 public submissions
▪ 947 petition signatures
▪ 23 ‘postcards’
Supportive – 249 submissions
The council engaged an independent town planning consultant to assess the application.
This assessment report was submitted to the panel on June 30.
The independent consultant town planner concluded that the proposed development was not a good planning outcome with regard to the environmental sensitivity of the land and locality.
The town planner said the design of the subdivision was not of a contemporary standard and did not reflect or embrace accepted urban design principles which seek to generate a high-quality living environment.
The panel is the determining authority for this application. The council does not determine the outcome.