There are a lot of areas zoned rural where the block sizes are routinely way less than the min lot size stated by council. I see this in both QLD and NSW and i'm sure is the same in toher states. In some cases this is quite extreme - for example recently I came across a 5 acre lot in an area zoned with min lot size of 20ha. The weird thing is that bordering this property were 2 houses next to each other on 700sqm and 550sqm respectively also in the same zoning. They are just randomly there in the middle of much larger blocks and way away from the nearest low density residential zoning. I am guessing that these lots were created a long time ago. Probably already had houses on them. Have anyone ever tried for rural subdivisions that are way less than the quoted min lot size, perhaps based on precedence/Clause 4.6 and been successful?
The precedence argument for a 4.6 is weak if it was an old subdivision from many planning instruments ago. If it was done recently I would definitely dig out the assessment reports it's worth looking into. Common problems with rural subdivisions and rural developments in general is bushfire and ecologically endangered habitat, building envelope and footprint location is very restricted because of possible required buffer zones determined by the specialist reports and studies you have to undertake.
What about applying for rezoning of rural land that is a smaller block size. E.g. you have say a 1acre block zoned RU1 (Primary production) in NSW. It is silly to think that this amount of land could be used for the purposes that zoning is intended for. If it wasn't too far from residential zoning (say a km or 2) would you have a case?
