Pete Evans’ Nightcap village overvalued by at least $7 million, to be determined by council

The controversial project was found to contain a number of unnecessary components which, once removed, brought the cost down by at least $7 million.

A proposed development for multiple rural land sharing communities in Mount Burrell and Kunghur area will no longer be decided by the state, after it was found to be overvalued and containing unnecessary components.

The planned development, known as Nightcap Village and spruiked by controversial celebrity chef Pete Evans, is for an “intentional community” which would cater for almost 400 dwellings.

The applicant has sought approval for $37 million worth of capital works, including an internal road network and solar panels with battery storage.

READ MORE: New policy to end Rural Land Sharing Communities makes exception for Nightcap Village

READ MORE: Developer seeks to pave the way for $37 million community

READ MORE: Pete Evans brushes off TGA fine as he launches NSW cooking retreat

However the cost listed by the proponent was advised to be under $30 million after unnecessary components were removed from the application, making it no longer the required value to be determined by the Northern Regional Planning Panel.

The developer is seeking approval for stage one of the project which is an upgrade of the existing private road and associated earthworks, vegetation removal and site construction office and storage area.

Tweed Shire Council’s director of planning and regulation, Vince Connell, said both the New South Wales Department of Planning, Industry and Environment were aware of the change.

“Council has reassessed the capital costs submitted by the proponent of DA21/0010 and removed components that should not have been included,” Mr Connell said.

“This reassessment has brought the development’s calculated capital costs to below $30 million and council will therefore determine the DA.

“Based on the calculated capital investment value of the proposal and following legal advice, council considers that it is the consent of authority for DA21/0010, not the Northern Regional Planning Panel,” Mr Connell said.

A report will be submitted to the planning committee in their July 1 meeting for the council’s determination of the DA.