Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-024-06 " ~ ~n REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, February 20,2006 Report #: PSD-024-06 File #: PLN 28.2 By-law #: Subject: IMPROVEMENTS TO MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION FORMULAE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-024-06 be received; 2. THAT Council endorse Report PSD-024-06 as the Municipality's comments on the proposed improvements to the Minimum Separation Distance Formulae; and 2. THAT the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry, the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: D id Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning Services ReVieWedbY:O ~~. Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer BMR/CP/DJC/df 13 February 2006 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF ClARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-024-06 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) has proposed changes to the Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Formulae. The proposed changes were forwarded to the Municipality on December 15, 2005 for comment by January 28th, 2006. To meet the deadline, staff prepared a response (Attachment 1) and are asking Council to endorse the comments in the staff letter. 1.2 The MDS is a tool used to ensure a sufficient buffer between agricultural uses and potentially conflicting residential land uses, and is intended to minimize nuisance complaints from odour. Presently two formulae are used in reviewing all building permit applications to determine minimum distance separations. When calculating the distance between a proposed new development and an existing livestock facility, MDS I is applied. When calculating the distance between a proposed new or expansion to an existing livestock facility and existing development, MDS II is applied. 2.0 PROPOSED AMENDMENTS 2.1 The following is a list of significant proposed changes: i) Clarification of implementation guidelines to ensure greater consistency of implementation. This clarification includes elaborating on what structures are considered agricultural buildings and would therefore require the application of the MOS. In the past, there has been confusion as to whether MDS applies to field shad shelters and barns that do not house livestock but are used for feeding. ii) Changes so that livestock uses and non-farm development are treated equally. Presently, the MDS formulae are weighted so a livestock facility can be constructed closer to an existing development than a new development could be constructed to the same livestock facility. OMAFRA is proposing that the calculation be applied equally when either new development or a new livestock facility is proposed. iii) Municipal Agricultural Advisory Committee to provide conflict resolution. In the Background of the Introduction, the MDS suggests a course of action for resolving issues with perceived abnormal odour, noise or dust should be with the assistance of the local Municipal Agricultural Advisory Committee (MAAC). REPORT NO.: PSD-024-06 PAGE 3 iv) Ministry reviews of MDS every five years. This review is to ensure the document reflects current land use planning practices, technological innovation within the livestock industry, and continues to meet the needs of the agricultural and rural communities. v) Allowance for the application of the MDS II expansion factor only following a minimum of three-years after the issuance of a building permit for livestock housing. The expansion factor is a component of the MDS calculations that applies to a building permit for an addition to an existing livestock facility. This factor provides flexibility for farmers when expanding an existing operation when that operation may be located near existing non-farm related development, by reducing the impact of an increase in livestock capacity within the MDS formula. A new facility would require a greater MDS than a livestock facility which has been expanded to the same capacity. The three-year time period is intended to apply to new facilities to prevent them from circumventing the greater distance requirement. vi) Additional information to help Committees of Adjustment and municipalities assess requests for minor variances. Previous MDS documents provided no direction for Committees of Adjustment when reviewing minor variances from the MOS. Within the proposed document, OMAFRA has provided some direction, including strongly recommending that no variance be granted except when proposed on an existing lot of record. This direction is quite limiting if a municipality chooses not to apply MDS to existing lots of record. The document does not elaborate further on proposed support for Committees of Adjustment, although it is implied that additional training and guidance as stated below would be provided to Committees as well. vii) More training and guidance for municipalities and other users of MDS. As with the previous MDS, a computer program is being designed to aid municipalities in calculating MOS. It is also anticipated that additional support will be provided through training sessions, and OMAFRA staff when required, however, the document does not outline those specific courses of action. viii) Stronger encouragement that municipalities apply MDS to existing lots of record. MDS must be applied to new development; however there is no requirement that MDS must be applied to existing lot of record. Applying the MDS to all existing lots of record may significantly restrict or even prohibit the owners of some lots from developing. REPORT NO.: PSD-024-06 PAGE 4 ix) Alignment with existing nutrient management tools (e.g. base MDS on Nutrient Units) Previous MDS calculations were based on "animal units". A single cow was considered one unit, while it took 125 chickens to amount to one unit. This calculation was based on animal mass. The proposed changes to the MDS would base calculations on Nutrient Units as outlined in the recently enacted Nutrient Management Act. This calculation is based on the production of nutrients in the potential fertilizer replacement. x) Specifying absolute minimum distances between livestock barns and houses, and vice versa. A minimum distance of 70 metres has been proposed, regardless of the scale of the livestock operation. Should the Municipality choose not to apply the MDS to existing lots of record, this provision will mainly impact proposed livestock buildings. Smaller agricultural lots and hobby farms will likely be impacted, they tend to be located in close proximity to other smaller lots with non-farm residences on them. A larger livestock operation is more likely to exceed the required 70 metre MDS and have a sufficient lot area to locate a livestock building outside the MDS area. Should the Municipality choose to apply the MDS to existing lots of record, this provision may result in a more widespread impact, such as prohibiting development on an existing lot of record if that lot is within 70 metres of an existing livestock building. xi) Minor changes to separation distances, where warranted (e.g. slightly larger separation distances for hobby farms with livestock, and slightly larger separation distances for some commercial sized operations such as segregated early weaning (SEW) sow barns. It would generally appear that the uses identified as not having a sufficient distance separation in the previous MDS formulae were increased to address the deficiency. xii) Requirement of MDS for manure storages, where no livestock are present on the property. Previous MDS calculations were based on a distance separation from manure storage in conjunction with a building or structure. The proposed amendments would include a separation from manure storage should it be located on a vacant lot, or in a separate location from a livestock building on the same lot. xiii) Requirement of MDS for anaerobic digester systems located on farms. Much like the MDS requirement for manure storage, anaerobic digester systems would also require MDS separation. REPORT NO.: PSD-024-06 PAGE 5 xiv) The MDS is to be applied. when new development is proposed near an empty livestock facility as the site still has the potential to be used. The previous MDS calculations applied only to active livestock buildings. The proposed MDS would apply to inactive buildings, as well as those buildings which have the potential to be converted to livestock facilities, but are presently being used for other agricultural purposes. Administering this portion of the MDS may require a greater input from the farmer who owns the inactive farm building. xv) OMAFRA is strongly encouraging the application of minimum distance separations from new livestock facilities to existing development when located within a settlement or urban area. Presently the MDS is not applicable within urban or settlement areas. OMAFRA suggests it is possible to apply MDS from proposed development to existing livestock facilities within an urban area, but that is not strongly advised. An amendment to Zoning By-law would be required to apply the MDS to either new livestock facilities or to new development within an urban or settlement area. 3.0 STAFF COMMENTS 3.1 Staff is generally in support of the proposed improvements to the MOS. Staff, in consultation with the Agricultural Advisory Committee, prepared comments which were forwarded to the Ministry at the end of January to meet the timeframe for commenting (Attachment 1). 3.2 Some concerns of Staff that were identified in the comments were requesting that the flexibility afforded to the Municipality, specifically in applying the MDS to areas within the urban and settlement areas, as well as the applying the MDS to existing lots of record be maintained. Should OMAFRA amend the proposed document to require or prohibit the Municipality from applying the MDS in these situations, the potential for inhibiting development, either as an expansion of an agricultural operation or construction on a vacant residential lot increases. By maintaining flexibility, Staff and Council have the opportunity to address specific situations within the Municipality in a creative way during the implementation of the new MDS in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. 3.3 The Terms of Reference for Municipal Agricultural Advisory Committees (MAAC) are established by the Municipality; most do not include conflict resolution as a responsibility of their Committee. The referencing of MAACs in this document implies that this additional task has been assigned to the Committees, regardless of a Municipality's desire to do so. No training in conflict resolution is being provided by the Ministry, therefore, it is presumptuous to assume that the local committees will have the REPORT NO.: PSD-024-06 PAGE 6 time and training to carry out this function, especially since there is a lack of criteria in how odour, noise and dust will be measured. 3.4 Through consultation with members of the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington (AACC) , some issues were identified that should be added to the proposed MDS. The inclusion of a definition for "Temporary Field Storage" was requested for clarification and interpretation purposes. The inclusion of structures such as abattoirs, slaughters houses and mushroom farms were also requested as they produce odour which would be considered offensive, and their inclusion would be appropriate. 3.5 Further study was requested on a definition for field shade shelters as they are exempt from MDS, but do not have a size limitation. Staff felt the lack of a defined term or size limitation left too much flexibility, and could permit a structure which does not meet the intent of the MDS. 3.6 Staff also requested that, in addition to the MDS, the Ministry develop guidelines to assist municipalities in establishing appropriate buffers between settlement areas and agricultural uses. As the Municipality grows to the limits of the Protected Countryside, a permanent boundary will be established between urban and rural areas. Although MDS could be applied to address odour impact in urban areas or settlement areas, and there are other impacts on residential areas such as machinery noise and spray drift. At the same time, residential areas in close proximity to agricultural operations can create increased problems for farmers, including increased risk of trespassing, theft and liability. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 Staff respectfully request that Council endorse the comments as outlined in Attachment 1. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Staff Comments on EBR PC05E1206, Improvements to Minimum Distance Separation Formulae List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington Attachment 1 To Report PSD-024-06 Clarmgron Energizing Ontario January 30, 2006 Policy Advisor Strategic Policy Branch 77 Grenville Street, 11 th Floor Toronto, Ontario, M5S1B3 Dear Sir: RE: EBR REGISTRY NUMBER: PC05E1206 IMPROVEMENTS TO MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARA TION FORMULAE PLN 28.2 The proposed Improvements to the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae was posted to the EBR site on December 14, 2005 with written submissions due by January 28, 2006. The 45 day review period happens to fall during the Winter Holiday recess of Council and advisory committees. Thus, the comments that follow have not been endorsed by Council or our Agricultural Advisory Committee. The Agricultural Advisory Committee is aware of the comments and may be providing additional comments. Council will be asked to endorse the comments at a regularly scheduled meeting in February. The improvements proposed address the requirements of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS) and the limitation of the existing Minimum Distance Separation Formulae with respect to the change in agricultural technology and farm practices and land use planning which have occurred since its inception in 1995. Through the review of the proposed Improvements to the Minimum Distance Separation, some areas have been identified for further consideration as follows: . The application of the MDS Formulae to existing lots of record; . the application of the MDS Formulae to developments within settlement and urban areas; and . the proposed 70 metre absolute minimum distance. These items, if not properly administered, have the potential to prohibit development on a lot, be it construction of a dwelling on a vacant lot, or the expansion of a farm operation. CORPORATION OF HE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTC 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE. ONTARIO L1 C 3A6 T (905) 623-33 MDS Page 2 Introduction In the Background of the Introduction, the MDS suggests a course of action for resolving issues with perceived abnormal odour, noise or dust should be with the assistance of the local Municipal Agricultural Advisory Committee (MAAC). As the terms of reference for the MMC are established by the Municipality, most do not include conflict resolution as a responsibility of their Committee. The referencing of MAACs in this document implies that this additional task has been assigned to the Committees, regardless of a Municipality's desire to do so. Conflict resolution by the MAAC's could pit neighbour to neighbour and is not the best way of resolving issues. In addition, no training in conflict resolution is being provided by the Ministry; therefore, it is presumptuous to assume that the local committees will have the time and training to carry out this function; especially since there is a lack of criteria in how odour, noise and dust will be measured. Perception is most often the problem. Definitions Reference is made to "Temporary Field Storage" within the proposed amendments. While it is interpreted that this term is consistent with the term as defined in the Nutrient Management Act, the definition of "Temporary Field Storage" should be included in this document for clarification and implementation purposes. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES (MDS I AND MDS II) General Flexibility to allow local Municipality's to apply the MDS within settlement and urban areas is appropriate. This can provide a municipality an additional tool to provide buffering between agricultural and urban developments, and when applied properly can direct development to more appropriate areas. As each municipality's have their own unique obstacles to development, providing them flexibility during the implementation of the MDS can be useful in achieving the goals of the MDS and of the municipality. Consideration should be given to applying MDS I and MDS \I to abattoirs, slaughter houses and mushroom farms. As it is the objective of the MDS to minimize nuisance complaints due to odour, and thereby reduce potential land use conflicts, including such uses would be consistent with the goals and objectives of the MDS. Lots of Record In the application of the MDS to existing lots of record, the proposed document provides Municipalities flexibility in applying the MDS Formulae to existing lots of record based on its own criteria. This will allow the Municipality to avoid the outright prohibition of development on a lot due to distance separations. This flexibility is vital, and provisions should be made to ensure this flexibility is afforded to Lower Tier Municipalities by OMAFRA and Upper Tier Municipalities should not be involved in setting the standard for the application of the formula. MDS Page 3 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES (MDS II) Measurements Field shade shelters are excluded from the MDS calculations, no limit to the size of field shade shelters has been established. As a result, the potential exists for a shelter or a number of shelters to be constructed, of a size and scale which may not meet the intent of the MDS. Further study into establishing a maximum size for a field shade shelter which is not required to meet the MDS should be undertaken. It is suggested that the Ministry review and develop guidelines to assist municipalities in dealing with appropriate buffers between settlement areas and' agricultural uses. Although odours and noise are the prevalent issues arising between residential development and the farming community, other issues could also be better addressed through the use of buffers, such as pesticide drift. This will become especially important with both the Greenbelt Plan and Places to Grow making urban boundary expansions more difficult. Municipal Staff supports the proposed Improvements to the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae as they more accurately reflect the intent of the MOS. Staff would recommend a review of the suggested improvements as outlined above, and implementation of those suggestions as defined. Should you require clarification of our comments please contact the undersigned at 905- 623-3379 extension 220. Yours truly i, a ger Development Review Planning Services Department *sh pc: Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington