Like rural subdivision, the potential proliferation of rural dwellings, and particularly across land in the Farming Zone (FZ) has the ability to significantly undermine the ability to conduct legitimate rural land use and activity. Given this, approvals of rural dwellings need to be carefully considered and managed, with this aspect of policy being fundamental to Rural Areas Strategy (RAS) to provide clear strategic direction.

A number of key issues have been identified, including:

• Current local planning policy contains minimal guidance on when and where rural dwellings should or should not be approved on small lots. Existing planning policy provides direction for considering applications for dwellings and residential uses in productive agricultural land without productive agricultural land areas being clearly identified.
• Land is purchased with an assumption that a dwelling will be able to be constructed, particularly on smaller lots or in proximity to other land with dwellings.
• Planning policy is not strong enough to discourage dwellings when they are not specifically demonstrated as required to support existing or proposed agricultural uses.
• The perception that farmland can be developed for residential use inadvertently applies a higher residential land value than farming value which can price farmers out of expanding their agricultural operations. Inappropriately located housing can negatively impact on the activities of legitimate agricultural enterprises.
• Updates to the State Planning Provisions allow the development of a small second dwelling where an existing dwelling exists. This can increase infill development and lead to increased amenity conflict between residential and agricultural uses.
• There are a significant number of small vacant FZ lots that could have owner demand to accommodate a dwelling.
• Some applications for dwellings are justified by permit applicants based on a Farm Management Plan, but with no real intent to conduct the proposed agricultural use.
• The use of a Section 173 agreement to tie operation of the land for farming with an associated use for a dwelling has been disputed at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal and it is unclear whether this is a legitimate method of ensuring that agricultural activity continues when there is a change in land ownership. It also places an onus and burden on Council to enforce the requirements of a Section 173 agreement.
• Applications for dwellings in the FZ are at times recommended for refusal by Council officers but this decision is overturned by Councillors.
• Rural dwellings when approved are often coupled with an expectation of residential for urban services, such as bin collection and read maintenance. With a rural rates base often being lower than an urban rates base, this can have a substantial cost imposition on Council’s service provisions.

A number of opportunities have been identified, including:

• Improve the strategic focus on population growth being generally focused and redirected within existing settlements.
• Consider whether it is appropriate to increase the RLZ in areas of low agricultural quality throughout Greater Bendigo.
• Highlight the cumulative negative impact on agriculture from dwellings in the FZ.
• Consider whether it is appropriate to provide delegation to Council Officers to refuse planning permits.
• Investigate further permit conditions that tie use of the land for a dwelling with a legitimate agricultural use that is enforceable.
• Within the FZ, there is a requirement that applications for a dwelling must be accompanied by a written statement explaining how the proposed dwelling responds to the decision guidelines for dwellings. There is an opportunity to set a Council based standard for what this statement must address and request clarity in a more hard-line manner for applications that do not have enough detail.

A number of potential strategies have been identified, including:

• Update local policy guidance on when and where to allow for the construction of a dwelling within the FZ based on certain guiding principles such as, agricultural productivity, proximity to existing settlements, the ability for it to be serviced etc.
• Clause 14.01-1L sets a blanket position that dwellings should be avoided unless they meet the very specific set of criteria. There may be an opportunity for allowing some dwellings through the Restructure Overlay, or similarly on small cluster lots in areas already lost to agriculture.
• Additional policies within Clause 14.01-1L set directions to avoid the construction of dwellings on existing small lots. This policy could be updated.
• Consider varying the minimum boundary setback requirement for buildings requiring a planning permit.