|
Wilken rezoning deferred again By Liz Dadson |
Huron-Kinloss Council To Comment on this article Click Here |
|||
|
A rezoning application that has been on the books for eight months, has been deferred once more by Huron-Kinloss' planning advisory committee. Put forward by Murray Wilken last June, the proposal would rezone, to general agriculture special from general agriculture, about 15 acres off the corner of his property as a non-farm lot, with the remaining 83 acres staying with the agricultural land. The 15 acres would include some hazard lands. The property is located on Lot 37, Concession 5, former Huron Township (43 Concession 6 West). The original application, presented by Cuesta Planning, was not supported by the Bruce County planning department. However, planner Heather James suggested reducing the proposed severed lot to 3.4 acres based on the applicant's implied acceptance at the public meeting. Last fall, Don Scott of Cuesta Planning met with township staff and county staff to discuss options because Wilken wanted the planning advisory committee to reconsider the 15-acre severed lot. Feb. 1, 2011, Scott sent a letter to the planning department, concerning a conservation easement across the hazard lands, as well as an interpretive opinion of farm size policies in the county and township Official Plans. The application came forward at the Feb. 7 planning advisory committee meeting attended by both Scott and James. Scott said the proposal is to sever off Class 5 land, while the rest of the property is prime farmland and remains in agricultural production. "We're just incorporating the hazard land in with the severed portion," he said. An idea has surfaced, said Scott, to have the hazard land turned into a conservation easement, purchased by the Ontario Conservancy. Then it could be rehabilitated by local groups, such as the Pine River Watershed Initiative Network. The easement would stay with the severed portion. James said a conservation easement to protect and enhance the hazard lands is an excellent tool to be implemented. However, it is not necessary for the hazard lands to be included in the non-farm lot (severed parcel) in order for a conservation easement to be established. "A conservation easement can still be applied to the hazard lands on the farm parcel (retained portion), protecting and restoring the lands," she said. "If the non-farm lot contained the hazard lands with a conservation easement, I am concerned that enforcement of the easement could be difficult to accomplish." She recommended refusing the application. "Why can't Murray (Wilken) keep the hazard lands and have them rehabilitated like you're telling us?" asked deputy mayor Wilfred Gamble. Scott said it would likely continue in agricultural activity which could damage the protected lands. "I think if we leave it with the farmer, it's safer than leaving it with the severed lot," said Gamble. "The conservation easement is a legal restriction on the property and would be enforced by the Conservancy," said Scott.
|
"Who enforces it, if the property becomes a hobby farm?" asked administrator Mary Rose Walden. "The Conservancy does," said Scott. "We've had to spend thousands of dollars to prosecute on behalf of our zoning bylaw," said Walden. "It's up to the Conservancy to deal with it," said Scott. "I thought this was an innovative way to deal with this problem," said councillor Jim Hanna, "but when you think about it, a new farm owner may decide to use the property for something else. We need to ensure some enforcement on this." Scott said it would be better to have the hazard land with the severed portion. Otherwise, it could end up with a herd of cattle stomping through the waterway. "It already is regulated land," said Hanna. "I'd like to see it listed on the Saugeen Valley Conservation Authority (SVCA) lands." "It was their suggestion; there's no problem," said Scott. "We can't base our decisions on what somebody might do in the future," said councillor Carl Sloetjes. "We can't stifle things because of a future possible change in ownership." "If the applicant is allowed to proceed, he needs an amendment to the Official Plan, and that was never applied for," said James. "What difference does it make if a new owner has the hazard lands, or the farmer owns it?" asked Gamble. "Why do all 15 acres need to be severed?" "It's less likely to be used for agriculture if it's separated from the farm," said Hanna. Walden said the concern is that the 15-acre parcel includes a surplus farm building which, in the future, could be used for animals and turned into a hobby farm. Hanna suggested deferring the application, pending a review of the proposal by the SVCA, regarding enforcement of a conservation easement. "You talk to the SVCA," he said to Scott. "Then come back and make sure Murray (Wilken) is here and Heather (James) will be here, and we'll deal with it then." The committee agreed. Scrolling stops when you move your mouse inside the scroll area. You can click on the ads for more
|
|||
|
 for
world news,
books, sports, movies ...Sunday, February 20, 2011 |
