General News
29 July, 2025
Planning application for Alma home denied
The Central Goldfields Shire Council have refused a planning application due to a farming overlay despite the site’s limited farming potential.
An application for a home, shed, and dam along Logan Road, Alma, has been brought to a halt this week due to its designation as farming land.
At this month’s council meeting, most councillor’s supported the officer’s recommendation that “the proposed use and development is inappropriate” considering the shire’s planning scheme.
The crux of the question seemed to be if the application supported an essential agricultural need or a rural lifestyle outcome within the Farming Zone.
“Approval in such circumstances would risk shifting the primary use of the land from agriculture to residential, undermining the objectives of the Farming Zone, which seeks to retain productive land for agricultural use and avoid the fragmentation of rural land,” the report read.
The site’s designation as farming land was at the heart of the matter for councillor Gerard Murphy.
“It’s not mixed use land, it’s farming land. I’m down that track and I’ve pretty much been strong on that for the last four and a half years,” he said.
Cr Murphy was concerned that if the application was approved, it would fragment the area’s land.
However, the report found the area was already highly fragmented, which was just one of many reasons why Cr De Villiers alone supported the application’s approval.
She explained the land is unsuitable for cropping, only low intensity grazing or pasture cultivation, shown through its class five status under the state’s land capability classification system.
“The applicants previously attempted to utilise the land for grazing activities but were forced to remove livestock due to the inadequate food resources available reinforcing the classification’s limitations in practical terms,” she said.
Furthermore, the seven hectare site is below the 10 hectare minimum threshold which Cr De Villiers said is generally recognised as the minimum for a viable farming unit.
“This alone raises questions about the lands longterm utility for primary production,” she said.
Ultimately, the report recommended that a dwelling was not required for the agricultural use of the land.
“While the applicant’s intentions may be genuine, the test under the Planning Scheme is not about the applicant’s personal aspirations, but whether the land use and development proposed aligns with the broader planning framework and policy expectations for rural land,” the report read.
The site’s fate came down to how it was zoned. The report explained although the site may have shared characteristics with nearby Rural Living Zoned land, it was not included in that zone.
“Until such time as a comprehensive rural land review is undertaken, any application must be assessed against the current zoning — specifically, the Farming Zone — and the relevant planning policies that apply,” the report stated.