It is a dilemma the last council faced, and no doubt the council before that. And it’s not going away anytime soon.
SDRC Councillors recently decided to change the boundaries of two pieces of land that straddled the Cunningham Highway. On the face of it, and looking at a map, it made sense. One large continuous block was created on the north side, and a smaller block on the south side of the highway.
But it is not that simple. The smaller block now may be of interest to someone wanting to buy a ‘lifestyle’ property. The positive description of a lifestyle property is a few acres that allows the owner to enjoy a slower pace of life and potentially engage in hobbies or small-scale farming, without relying on it as their primary income source. It's a blend of residential living with elements of rural life, offering a balance between investment and enjoyment. The negative side is that lifestyle blocks break up perfectly productive agricultural land.
No doubt all councillors have an opinion on the matter but the Town & Country Journal recently spoke to veteran politician Cr Ross Bartley about the matter. He agreed that it is a very difficult issue.
“I’m torn between the deep and the dark blue here; it’s everyone’s democratic right to buy a block of land if they’ve got the money, and it’s their democratic right to build a house.”
What he, and no doubt many residents of the Southern Downs, don’t want is a “massive intrusion” of lifestyle properties that negatively impact the agricultural sector.
Cr Bartley says that all farmers in the region “know what they can get for 10 acres in a rural setting” and it is far more than what they can get from farming the acres.
It is possible that the problem will get worse if Council moves to reduce setbacks from boundary lines when considering new housing on these types of blocks. It is not an idea Cr Bartley agrees with and he urges farmers to “say something”.
“It’s a real concern in horticulture, small holdings,” he said. Allowing lifestyle properties sets up future confrontation between landowners as spraying, harvesting, weaning and other standard agricultural work is performed close by.
What can council do?
During the ordinary meeting of council in April, when the property boundaries were debated, Mayor Melissa Hamilton referred to a possible solution which is the Right to Farm legislation in NSW.
In NSW the Right to Farm Act 2019 was enacted to balance land use conflicts exactly like the ones playing out in the Southern Downs. The Act protects farmers from common law nuisance claims related to normal farming activities. This “nuisance shield” prevents courts from imposing injunctions on farmers without first considering other remedies. The Act also includes provisions for farm trespass and includes provisions for damaging property or releasing stock during trespass.
Of course, the SDRC does not have the power to initiate similar legislation in Queensland but they can advocate for it with State ministers. Alternatively, council can amend the SDRC planning scheme to reflect similar values in the Southern Downs, perhaps making it harder to break up agricultural land, build on small block or complain about industrial farming noise or smell. Council could also amend the planning scheme to make it easier for lifestyle blocks to be carved out of current agricultural land and be developed with houses. It remains to be seen which way this council might go.
“There’s nothing worse than conflict in the rural sector,” Cr Bartley concludes.
