Loomberah feedlot proposal denied: Tamworth Regional Council votes against 999-head feedlot proposal as NSW Land and Environment Court appeal concerns loom

Tamworth Regional Council (TRC) refused the proposal after more than an hour of contentious debate, as concern about a potentially expensive appeal in the NSW Land and Environment Court from either the proponent or the community hung thick in the air.

Rebecca Brady has owned the property next door for the last two decades and said it would have a significant impact on her family.

"Personally I remain concerned for the quality of life and mental health of the residents of the lane, many of which ... are only just recovering from a very tough time during the drought."

Councillors were torn between personal responsibility to the community and an obligation to make a lawful decision on the project based on its merits and what's allowed under the planning rules.

Cr Glenn Inglis asked the council to consider deferring the decision until next year for an independent report. That suggestion was shot down.

"Mr Mayor, do I believe this is a good location for an intensive feedlot? No I do not, but under our LEP [Local Environmental Plan] it is permissible with consent, in fact this DA has highlighted pitfalls with our LEP regards to potentially offensive industries being able to locate in inappropriate rural areas; in particular traditional farming areas typified by low-density farming operations," he said.

Read also:

"To make matters a bit harder, this project from day one has been managed very poorly by the applicant; in particular by failing to consult and displaying a total disregard to the opinions of the local community."

The council rejected the application based on 'inadequate information' in the environmental impact statement, pointing to an independent report by Dr Robert Banks.

But, not all councillors were convinced it was the right decision.

Cr Russell Webb said he thought the council had "shot itself in the foot", while mayor Col Murray said it was a "recipe for disaster".

"In my personal opinion I think this has got very little hope of being supported in an appeal and I fear for the consequences of the residents out there," he said.

"They may not have many of the benefits of the conditions recommended by the council staff."

General manager Paul Bennett said the difficulty with the refusal is that the staff wouldn't change their professional opinion if the matter went to court.

"If you are going to refuse that DA you have to state the planning reasons as to why it is being refused so we have a basis to defend the matter should we end up in court," he said.

"If this ends up in the Land and Environment Court, the councillors that have made a decision on a basis that they have put in front of the council are the ones that will have to defend this, because the staff will not change their professional opinion they have provided to the council.

"You have to be able to stand in front of a court and say to them the reasons why you believe this DA does not comply with those sections."

The proponent, Goonoo Goonoo Pastoral Company's Tony Haggarty, did not make representations to the council at the meeting.

Love agricultural news? Sign up for The Land's free daily newsletter.