Relying on the viability of a farming enterprise to stop residential encroachment on valuable agricultural land is a "broken model", according to a leading urban planner.
Baw Baw Shire council and the Victorian Administrative and Civil Tribunal recently rejected a planning application for a house and calf rearing operation at Longwarry, on the grounds the enterprise was not viable.
The land is in a Farming Zone, to the south of the town, on a former dairy farm, which was subdivided a number of years ago.
RMIT University Associate Professor in Sustainability and Urban Planning Andrew Butt said the ruling was not unusual, as it followed some typical approaches to what was meant by a farm's viability.
"In terms of Farming Zones, the planning system is designed to maintain land for farming activities," Assoc Prof Butt said.
"But the idea of what constitutes a farming activity, versus a residential activity or hobby farm, is constantly challenging elements of the planning system."
The system "encouraged a fiction", in that applicants wanting to build a house in a Farm Zone had to prove they had a farm business "that may, or may not, be viable or may, or may not, exist.
"It's almost like a pantomime that plays out," Assoc Prof Butt said.
The applicant might well have been successful with another tribunal member, he said, leading to issues of consistency.
The Agriculture Minister Gayle Tierney was pressed on the government's plans to protect prime agricultural land, at the recent Victorian Farmers Federation conference.
Approval of a dwelling on the property would have shifted the land out of an agricultural market and into a residential land market, Assoc Prof Butt said.
"The fact someone is saying a house is needed to run the calf operation means the argument they are making is to prove it is a farm," he said.
"Once you get down to very small farming operations, the question is raised as to whether this is simply a residential use, with a bit of farming activity on it, rather than the other way around."
He said notions like the viability of a farming activity were very hard to determine.
'If you are $5 million in hock to the bank, are you a viable farm - even though you might be very, very big?" he said.
"It's not a very useful metric."
Determining viability was "really fluid and difficult - we'd don't have a very well-differentiated zoning system, for different kinds of farming systems.
"From a policy setting, it's being done because it's meant to send a message to the market that this is not land you can buy and use for residential purposes - this is land that should be priced, within an agricultural land market."
But he said it was a "broken model", particularly in areas like Baw Baw Shire, where so much land had been fragmented.
"It's really, really difficult to unscramble that omelette of bringing it back into an agricultural land market and out of a potential residential land market," he said.
"If examples like this send a message to the market, they are few and far between and the market is certainly not listening.
"Someone will still buy these properties and still have a go at it (to build a house) - it's very unclear that this is a model that will sufficiently work, to send a signal to someone to say I will sell this land at a loss a neighbouring farmer."
In other regions, councils might be keen not to have "fragmented housing, across the landscape.
"It's about servicing those properties, it's about cost, it's not just about the idea of maintaining the land for agricultural use," he said.
The Rural Planner director Linda Martin-Chew said both the council and the tribunal member had made the right decision, based on the characteristics of the land, the information supplied by the applicant and planning controls.
"It sounds like the applicants did not provide very much evidence to support the viability, commercial nature of the business or environmental management," Ms Chew Martin said.
Baw Baw Shire could not have made a decision on the dwelling application, due to the fact the applicant did not provide enough information.
"A calf-rearing enterprise, on seven hectares, with flooding issues probably needed a considerable level of technical detail, to support it," she said.
"Notwithstanding, the application is about the dwelling, not about that use - it's quite an intensive use on that amount of land.
"They were talking about confining the calves, for a considerable time, so the environmental issues are massive."
Ms Chew-Martin said a stronger compliance regime, making sure the farm activities applicants said they were going to carry out took place, might result in fewer planning applications being put forward for houses on agricultural land without primary production taking place
"You are putting trust in the person," she said.
"Every block is different - Baw Baw is one of the most productive areas, with the highest levels of agricultural productivity, that we have in Victoria - if it's flooded, then maybe it's okay for horticulture.
"Is it productive, or do I need to live there, is a separate issue?"
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.
