PLANS to build a large-scale horticulture centre at Mallala will be contested in court, after Adelaide Plains Council (APC) rejected the proposal over fears it could have an adverse effect on nearby farmers.

Horticulture company Agrisano Holdings had an application to build a 10-greenhouse hydroponic horticulture facility rejected by the Adelaide Plains Council Assessment Panel (CAP) last month, but are now challenging the decision in the Environment, Resources and Development (ERD) court.

The development was planned for a 77ha space on Wasleys Road, approximately three kilometres from the centre of the township.

As the proposal was classed as a “category one” type of development, no public consultation was required to be undertaken before it went before the CAP.

Development was proposed to take place in four stages, which when completed would include 10 two-hectare greenhouses, a nursery and staff amenity building.

According to documents submitted to the CAP, Agrisano expected the proposal to create 178 jobs.

The CAP ultimately rejected the application over a lack of “formed, all-weather public roads” to access the area and expected “unreasonable interference” with nearby road infrastructure.

In addition, concerns over the effect of the hydroponic greenhouse operation on nearby grain farmers were noted as reasons to reject the application.

“New primary production development (including open field and enclosed horticulture) should be sited and designed to ensure that it does not detrimentally impact upon normal day‐to‐day activities (including chemical spraying) of established primary production uses on adjoining land,” the CAP’s response to Agrisano stated.

“The proposal is at variance with this principle of development control in that, insufficient information has been provided to ensure the day to day activities do not impact on the adjoining land or locality.”

Agrisano received notification from APC that the development consent for the project had been refused on March 26. A day later, the company filed documents in the ERD court disputing the decision.

In the court documents, viewed by The Bunyip, Agrisano argued APC “erred in issuing a (development) refusal”.

“The horticulture to be undertaken is enclosed and protected from external influences and from adjoining activities by its enclosure and will not impinge upon the continuation of cropping and grazing,” the documents read.

“Having regard to the subject site and locality, features and containment of the development, mitigation of potential adverse impact, and having regard to the relevant provisions of the development plan, the proposal warranted development plan consent being granted and the council has therefore erred in issuing a refusal.”

A meeting between Agrisano, APC and nearby farmers affected by the proposal was held yesterday, after The Bunyip’s print deadline.