GANNAWARRA Council has approved the development of a broiler farm in Kerang East, with a farm capacity of 800,000 birds.
Council approved a planning application for the development and associated buildings and works at the 369ha Murray Valley Highway site, but with more than 24 conditions, including the upgrade of Hebb Road, or pay an equivalent contribution for council to complete the works to access major standard.
The application was advertised to surrounding property owners and occupiers and one written submission was received.
Council officers recommended the application for approval, saying the proposal was considered to be appropriate for the site and consistent with the provisions of the Gannawarra Planning Scheme.
The proposal is to establish eight free range broiler sheds on two of the parcels of land which will create two poultry farms on the property.
Farm one consists of an existing dwelling and sheds and is to be accessed from the Murray Valley Highway. A new managers residence is proposed to be constructed on farm two and accessed from Hebb Road.
The closest neighbouring dwelling from the site is located approximately 1100 metres away from the edge of the closest shed.
The total number of poultry sheds proposed is 16 with each shed approximately 3024 square metres in total area.
The proposal is to be staged over a four-year period of construction. The proposed buildings on farm one are setback over 800 metres from the Murray Valley Highway and the proposed buildings on farm two are setback over 100 metres from Hebb Road.
Council planning and regulatory services manager Kellie Burmeister, in her report, said it was proposed that each shed will have the capacity to house 50,000 birds with the total per farm being 400,000.
The number of production cycles per year is six with approximately six weeks of bird occupation and 10 days cleaning phase per shed.
The birds are to be grown for human consumption.
The hours of operation for the proposed development is 24 hours a day, seven days a week. It is proposed that the development will employ a total of three to four full-time employees per site with the farm managers required to live onsite.
Key issues raised by the objector were the local area surface drain that runs through the property should be fenced, town water supply, complaints/issues process, landscaping/odour and traffic movements.
In response, council said whilst town water was available, they will not be guaranteed any supply of water as the pressure is so low. They will also not allow a connection straight to the house from the pipeline.
Cr Ross Stanton, who moved the recommendation, said the development brought diversity to the Gannawarra.
“In our 2021-2025 council plan, under goal two in growth: Grow Gannawarra through diverse and broad economy,” he said.
“We did have one objection … I read those issues also note the planning officer’s responses to those and they have been clearly addressed in the report.
“I can’t see why, as a productive council we should not just be approving those and moving on and having diversity in Gannawarra and growth.
“It will bring jobs and growth, isn’t that what we are here for?”
Cr Jane Ogden said the planning manager contacted the objector who was satisfied with the remedies the developer would need to follow.
Cr Garner Smith attempted to lay the matter on the day until an unscheduled meeting four days later to “allow due diligence and consultation with the objector”.
“The reason I am speaking against is not because I’m against the development, quite the opposite, but the problem is proper governance has not occurred in this case, in my opinion, and certain due diligence with the objector has not occurred.”
Cr Smith said he was the only councillor who “brothered to pick up the phone and talk to the objector”.
“We would have had absolutely no idea what his thoughts are on the matter,” he said.
“When we were discussing this at the briefing, I asked the question, if the objector was not happy what could happen.
“Now, he could go to VCAT, and there was al this flurry of activity of getting it done fast because the developer needed to know.
“If the objector went to VCAT it could delay the project by 12 months.
“I would have thought as a responsible councillor and council, that wants to see this development go ahead, we should be talking to the objector.”
Cr Smith later apologised for naming the objector during the meeting on at least two occasions.
Cr Keith Link admitted he didn’t know where the proposed site was located.
“I’m still waiting to see a plan of the site, so you’re asking me to vote for it when I don’t even know where it is.
“I’d like to meet the objector to make sure he’s happy and understands.”
Cr Charlie Gillingham told Cr Link the plans were in briefing notes handed to councillors.
Cr Stanton told councillors “we need to find the time” to read the information that is provided.
“I’m sorry, Cr Link, you should know where this is, you should have read that info.
“If you haven’t that is on you and not the rest of council.
“The five issues raised by the objector, which I won’t name because that is not appropriate, are clearly addressed.
“We have trained staff to do this (consult with objector).
“There is an old saying, ‘too many cooks can spoil the both’.
“Let the trained people do their job, read your information and move on.”
The motion was carried four votes to three.
