Dr Richard Gates says that a year after the LEC approved resident development the property is still for sale. Is insurability the problem?
It was a year ago, on July 31, 2024, that the Land & Environment Court (LEC) approved residential development at the controversial Iron Gates site at Evans Head.
The approval followed an appeal by the developer against a decision of the Northern Regional Planning Panel (NRPP) in August 2022 at which it refused residential development.
Despite its refusal, the NRPP introduced the concept of ‘shelter-in-place’ in its final determination to assist future residents overcome serious risks of fire and flood to which the site is prone should development proceed at some future date.
The shelter-in-place was to be managed by residents. The public had no opportunity to oppose the concept at the determination.
Shelter-in-place a central feature
Shelter-in-place became a central feature of the LEC approval in 2024, notwithstanding subsequent NSW State planning policy indicating it was not appropriate for this greenfield site [see point 4 on page 4 of the document].
The LEC hearings, including a failed S34 conciliation meeting in early 2023 and consideration of a modified development application rejected on the grounds that it was, in effect, a new DA, saw the Chief Judge take over the case with final decision in July 2024.
That approval decision included many demanding conditions for future development and made reference to a flurry of ‘expert reports’ where agreement was reached about complex issues raised during the Court hearings
Out of the public view
Many of those expert reports and their conclusions were reached out of the public view. They were subsequently made available to the public.
Richmond Valley Council, the respondent to the LEC case brought by the developer, decided not to appeal the case, much to the disappointment and anger of many locals opposed to the development.
Council sought ‘independent’ legal opinion on the chances of success of an appeal and how much additional money might need to be spent without guarantee of success.
Council had already spent around a million dollars on the Iron Gates by the early 2000s including legal proceedings in a civil damages claim against council in the Supreme Court of Queensland brought by the now defunct Iron Gates Pty Ltd and developer Graeme Ingles.
The terms of the settlement
According to Council, the developer sought to settle the case by withdrawing the appeal, subject to each party bearing their own costs – but the terms of the settlement were not made public [see item 14.1 Iron Gates Development: Notice of Intention to Appeal September Minutes Richmond Valley Council 2024].
However, Council would certainly know and have known the terms of the settlement, but according to a spokesperson for Evans Head Residents for Sustainable Development Inc., Council has chosen not to make those terms available to the public begging the question why has that information been kept from the public and have those terms conditioned the way in which council managed the case in the LEC?
We have seen an expert agreement on how the Iron Gates land was to be carved up for future development registered by the Queensland Supreme Court, but we do not know the conditions under which that agreement was reached and how they were to be used in future development applications.
Millions of dollars were spent by the appellant on legal fees and expert reports and evidence compared with the $365,000 spent by Richmond Valley Council. Council was unable to match the resources of the developer.
The resource imbalance
Council was very clear in evidence given in the LEC trial that it didn’t have the resources to manage existing council infrastructure, let alone those the Iron Gates development would create.
The same might be said of the legal and other expert resources critical to managing the case in the LEC.
The resource imbalance was made worse by the fact that Richmond Valley is one of the poorest in the state in terms of various socioeconomic indicators.
Did the NSW State government really expect Richmond Valley to match the developer in the courts?
This raises the bigger question, is the current system such that it is almost invariable that local government will fail at legal challenge when it comes to big developers because of the resource issue?
One of the interesting features of the Iron Gates case is that once the residential development was approved by the LEC, the property was put up for sale, without explanation. More than a year later (as at August 11, 2025), it’s still for sale.
There’s been a great deal of speculation about why the property’s not sold but its risk profile for flood and fire may be a critical factor.
Insurance for both the developer build and for residents who want to build there may be a problem.
The Northern Rivers has had multiple fire and flood disasters in the last few years and insurance premiums have increased dramatically. For some, insurance is no longer available.
Perhaps those thinking of buying have assessed that risk?
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
