Victoria's highest planning tribunal has knocked back an application for a calf-rearing operation, in a contested farm zone in Melbourne's growing peri-urban area.
Stoian Radici applied for a permit to build a house and set up a calf-rearing operation just south of Longwarry,Vic, but the plan was rejected by the Baw Baw Shire council.
Mr Radici appealed the rejection of the permit, for the seven-hectare block at Lot Three, 25 Old Drouin Road, Longwarry, at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.
The VCAT member Michael Nelthorpe said he was "left in doubt regarding the feasibility of the activity".
"The council says the proposal is inconsistent with planning policy seeking the protection of agricultural land," Mr Nelthorpe said.
"To elaborate, it says that it was provided with insufficient information to determine if the calve-rearing (sic) activity was a viable agricultural enterprise.
"Accordingly, it submits that there is no valid reason to support a dwelling on the site, as this would result in the loss of productive agricultural land."
He said he agreed with council planning policy and upheld the shire's decision.
"Clause 14.01-1S of the Planning Scheme 'seeks to protect the state's agricultural base by preserving productive farmland' and includes a strategy to limit new housing development in rural areas by 'discouraging development of isolated small lots in the rural zones from use for dwellings or other incompatible uses'," he said.
The decision comes after Agriculture Minister Gayle Tierney told the recent Victorian Farmers Federation conference action was happening on greater protection for farm land in Victoria's peri-urban areas.
Mr Radici told the tribunal the proposed calf-rearing activity ensured the site was being used for productive agriculture and that required a dwelling for an on-farm manager.
He told the tribunal the site was bought eight years ago to establish the calf-rearing enterprise.
About 40 calves within a few days of birth would be bought in the district either directly from other farms or from sale yards such as at Pakenham and be housed on the site for about 10-12 weeks, he said.
"They would then be sold and the cycle repeated," Mr Nelthorpe said, in his judgement.
"They (the permit applicants) say that calf rearing is a niche activity complementary to the district's main activities of dairy farming and cattle grazing.
"They also say it can be scaled to suit this landholding."
But shire planning officers told the tribunal fundamental issues with the application included insufficient detail to justify building a house and the lack of a Farm Management Plan.
The matter had a "protracted" history, the tribunal was told.
"The applicant was afforded the opportunity to address significant concerns raised by council and Agriculture Victoria," a shire planning officers report, presented to the tribunal, said.
"It is not the intent of the Farming Zone to allow additional dwellings to facilitate the establishment of a lifestyle opportunity under the guise of an 'economically viable' business venture," the officer's report found.
"Such a process can result in the prices for farming properties becoming artificially inflated, which threatens the ability for genuine farmers to acquire more land to expand their farming operations as land becomes cost prohibitive."
Mr Nelthorpe said he accepted the council's submission that it was not provided with sufficient information to determine if the activity was a "viable agricultural enterprise.
"The applicant did not contest this submission, rather they described the proposed calve-rearing activity in their submissions to the Tribunal," he said.
"This is not evidence from an independent farm management consultant or person of similar expertise.
"As such, it carries considerably less weight as the author of these submissions is not independent and was not available for cross examination by the other parties."
He also said Mr Radici should have presented that detail to the council, to allow for "discussion, refinement and validation".
Mr Nelthorpe also heard about flooding and biosecurity concerns, raised by Ten-Rose International Simmental and Fleckveigh stud co-principals Chris and Sharon Jordan, whose property is near the block.
The Jordans also challenged the financial viability of the project, saying the cost of purchasing and feeding the calves significantly exceeded the likely sale price.
"They note that the details of the activity do not address biosecurity issues or contamination of surface waters, nor do they address the management of calves during times of inundation," Mr Nelthorpe said in his judgement.
"They say that the previous farmer could not use the review site after heavy rainfall because of pooling of stormwater on the grey clay base of the site.
"They refer to several strategic planning studies that identify flooding issues in the area containing the site and provide several photographs of the site under sheets of floodwater."
Mr Nelthorpe said he was not persuaded biosecurity and contamination issues were fully resolved, and he had no information regarding the potential impact of flooding on the calf-rearing activity.
Want to read more stories like this?
Sign up below (select Dairy News) to receive our e-newsletter delivered fresh to your email inbox twice a week.
Andrew Miller
I'm a general reporter with Stock & Land, with a special interest in irrigation issues. I completed my cadetship, with the Age, in 1980. Over my career, I've worked for ABC radio news (Mt Isa, Qld) and at provincial and suburban newspapers.
I'm a general reporter with Stock & Land, with a special interest in irrigation issues. I completed my cadetship, with the Age, in 1980. Over my career, I've worked for ABC radio news (Mt Isa, Qld) and at provincial and suburban newspapers.
