Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-10-11 Minutes1 -2 CLARINGTON AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11f ", 2012 012 -20 Moved by Brenda Metcalf, seconded by Eric Bowman "That the actions taken at the August 23rd meeting be approved since there was no quorum." Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington October 11 "', 2012 Presentations: Chris Darling from CLOCA provided an overview of Ontario Regulation 42/06 on development regulations and tile drainage (attached). The discussion following the presentation included a number of questions, of which the answers can be found below: - ]n the case of Provincially Significant Wetlands, mapping is fairly accurate due to field truthing. Where there is concern, either around the existence of the natural feature on the lands or around the size or location of such a feature, conservation authority staff can go out in the field to make the determination. - The definition of a wetland is set out in the Conservation Authorities Act. Land that is currently being farmed and no longer has hydric soils or vegetation dominated by water tolerant plants, in most cases, does not meet the definition of a wetland. - Soil that could be tile drained would have to be examined in the field to determine that there would be no adverse effects on the natural features. - The CA Guidelines document how often Regulation mapping is to be formally updated, therefore it is sometimes creates challenges when providing answers to individuals who are purchasing farmlands in a timely manner. However, CLOCA is now updating mapping immediately which they then present to their Board on an annual basis for formal approval which is sent to the Ministry and Municipality. - Setback requirements for water courses, including intermittent water courses, is generally 30 meters. However, if you can farm it and there is no defined bed and bank, it would not meet the definition of watercourse under the Regulation, thus no standard setback — it will depend on the activity being pursued. Karen Cooper from URS presented on the MTO's 401 Improvements from Courtice Rd. to East Townline Rd. She indicated that no timelines have been set in place as of yet for the proposed improvements. Highlights included:, highway asphalt layer rehabilitation and bridge rehabilitation, widening and /or replacement, interchange ramp improvements at some locations along the highway, highway widening to accommodate 4 additional lanes between Courtice Rd and Liberty Street and 2 additional lanes between Liberty Street and Highway 35/115 and the creation of 4 storm water management ponds — as required - on abutting lands or within the interchange footprints for highway drainage. The discussion following the presentation included questions and comments, of which the responses can be found below: - At this point, storm water management pond locations are only proposed locations that have been chosen based on outlet location and having relatively low impacts on land. Should committee members or other members of the public feel there is a concern around the proposed lands, they are encouraged to make their concerns known to the MTO. All proposed lane widenings have been based on simulated growth models which take into account forecasted demand up to 2031. These models did not indicate a need to increase the number of lanes east of Highway 35/115 in Bowmanville. Tim Sorochinsky from URS presented on the Holt Rd. Interchange improvements which are taking place primarily to accommodate OPG's needs in anticipation of the Darlington Agricultural Advisory Committee of Caarington October 11 th 2012 refurbishment and New Build projects. Highlights included: the creation of three roundabouts instead of traffic intersections in order to maintain traffic flows, they reduce the occurrence and severity of collisions, and decrease air pollution from idling. The earliest that this project would . be completed is 2015. Currently, the comment period for the public on the Environmental Assessment is open. It is anticipated that the 30 -day review period for the EA document will commence in December of this year. The discussion following the presentation included a number of questions, of which the answers can be found below: The proposed roundabouts have been specifically engineered to accommodate a variety of traffic needs, including the effective travel and transportation of farm vehicles, machinery, and equipment. Tim indicated that property owners in the area have been very cooperative in allowing teams to access their properties for field work /study purposes. If property owners are experiencing inconveniences above and beyond what was set out in their respective agreements, they are encouraged to make their concerns known. This project comes with a price tag of approximately 20 to 25 million dollars. In addition to the comments on the projects there was concern raised by a number of the committee members with regard to the current notification by MTO to property owners or renters along the 407 corridor that MTO is seeking possession in 2013. The concern is that the lands will not be farmed for 3 -4 years which causes issues for surrounding farmers, and also there is a lack of replacement lands for the loss of production from these farms. There appears to be little understanding from MTO as to the impact on the local economy of this decision. During the discussion of this item it was indicated by the consultants and MTO representative that the reason for this decision is because of issues of access for archeological work and soil (geotechnical testing). Regardless of these reasons, which are items that can be worked out in co- operation with the farmer leasing the land, the concern regarding leaving the land fallow for a number of years is greater consequences and needs to be addressed. Business Arising Correspondence and Council Referrals 1) Federal Ridings Information: Clarington Council has concern over the proposed federal, ridings boundary changes which propose to divide Clarington into three ridings — Oshawa - Durham, Oshawa- Bowmanville, and Kawartha Lakes — Port Hope — Cobourg. Most concerning is that part of Clarington will be joined with Port Hope, Kawartha Lakes and Cobourg to form a new riding. It is preferable that Clarington remain with the rest of Durham Region since separating_ could be problematic for a number of reasons. Faye will send out report that Council endorsed, to the committee. The Mayor will be making a presentation at the Hearings regarding this item as will the Clarington Board of Trade. 2) 401 Overpasses — Cobbledick and East Townline EA: currently, the comment period is open. Liaison Reports Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington October 11th, 2012 DAAC — The 10th annual Farm Tour was very successful. Eric commented that the meal was exceptional. Jenni mentioned that people should sign up for the agricultural e- newsletter from the Region to receive updates. DRFA — DRFA held their Annual Meeting on September 25th. Don Lovisa, President of Durham College, spoke on the College's new agriculture programs. He also indicated that the College is actively seeking agriculture partners for co -ops, research projects, input on course content, etc. Keith Curry of the OFA reviewed issues OFA have commented on. DRFA is currently seeking representatives that would serve as Directors. November 18, 19 is the Young Farmers' Forum and OFA convention is November 19, 20. Durham Farm Connections -April 2,3,4 will be held again at Vipond Arena for grade 3 children to learn about farming. As in the past the one night will be open to the general public. High School Farm Connections Program was held at Maxwell Heights Secondary School in Oshawa and was very successful with 200± in attendance. Students had the chance to ask questions. The school being considered for next year does have an agricultural program as a skills major. CBOT — Don is proposing that CBOT hold and event between the AACC, CBOT Board and Council members. The focus would be on agriculture as a business, its impact on the community and other businesses. The committee suggested it be operated as a tour much like the tour given to Planning Staff a few years ago. The possilbiyt of a wrap -up speaker, someone like Ken Knox were also discussed. Jenni updated the group that CBOT offices have moved into Balmoral Place and they have a meeting room that members can use for business. meetings. Other Business Greenbelt Advisory Committee Eric is now a member of the Greenbelt Council. Farmer's Parade of Lights Parade will be taking place December 5th, 2012 and starts at 6pm in Enniskillen then proceeds to Tyrone and Hayden. Gary to sign the permits. ( ?) Provincial Policy Statement Faye alerted the committee that the Ontario Provincial Policy Statement is up for its 5 -year review. There are some proposed changes around wording. The largest change in relation to agriculture is the change of "secondary uses" to agriculture related uses and clarification of definition (see attachment). Planning Staff are preparing a report for GPA and will be addressing these changes and others. The changes to agriculture are positive as they should clarifiy that secondary uses are to be related to the farm. Ethanol Plant at Oshawa Harbour Councillor Partner inquired. how committee members felt about the Ethanol Plant in Oshawa. There have been recent public meetings in .Oshawa on the ethanol plant and it was recently announced that the Ethanol Plan would be proceeding at Oshawa Harbour. Oshawa City Council and Durham Region have both passed resolutions in opposition to the plant. Brock has offered to host the plant, however, the economics of the plant do not work in Brock. Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington October 11th, 2012 .Discussion included comments about the deep water harbour in Oshawa being what makes the economics of the plant work. A comparison was drawn to distilleries such as Seagrams in Amherstburg and Hiram Walkers in Windsor both of which receive shipments of grain by rail and boat and then once the grain has been fermented it is shipped to farmers as feed, the grain in fact becomes more valuable to the farmers. When the distillation process is happening there is odour; however, it is only for a limited period of time. Both of these plants are in very urban settings, more urban than the site in Oshawa at this time. Members believe that development of residential as well as the ethanol plant could be achieved with some innovation. Having the ethanol plant available to ship product to is seen as a positive to the agricultural community, which is why so many members of the farming community support this project. 12 -21 Moved by Tom Barrie, seconded by Brenda Metcalf, "The Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington supports development of the ethanol plant at the Oshawa Harbour Site." CARRIED Meeting Schedule In the past the September meeting has been skipped because of Orono Fair and as such there is a late August meeting but no September meeting. The schedule of the meetings is presented each year in January if the committee wishes to change the schedule in future years they can do so at the January meeting. Future Agendas Faye advised that by now, most will have received reassessment notices from MPAC and will have noticed that the value of their properties has gone up, in some cases considerably. Consequently, Mike Porporo from MPAC will be attending the November meeting to discuss the reassessment and answer questions. January Meeting- Dan McMorrow will be in attendance regarding farm insurance and retail sales from the farm. John Cartwright moved to adjourn. CARRIED Next Meeting November 8th, 2012, 7:30pm. Mike Porporo from MPAC will be speaking regarding recent reassessments. Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington October 11 jn, 2012 Attachment 1 Conservation Authorities Act and Ontario Regulation 42/06 Extracts Note: Italicized and bolded text added by Chris Darling. Development prohibited 2. (1) Subject to section 3, no person shall undertake development, or permit another person to undertake development in or on the areas within the jurisdiction of the Authority that are, (a) adjacent or close to the shoreline of the Great Lakes -St. Lawrence River System or to inland lakes that maybe affected by flooding, erosion or dynamic beaches, including the area from the furthest offshore extent of the Authority's boundary to the furthest landward extent of the aggregate of the following distances: (i) the 100 Year flood level, plus the.: ;appropriate allowance for wave uprush shown in the column headed "100 Year Flood Limit" found in Table 7.1 of the document entitled "Lake Ontario Shoreline Management Plan ", December 1990, which is available at or through the Authority at its head office located at 100 Whiting Avenue,,Oshawa, Ontario, LIH 3T3, (ii) the predicted long term stable slope projected from the existing stable toe of the slope or from the predicted location of the toe of the slope as that location rxiay have shifted as a result of shoreline erosion over a 100 -year period, (iii) where a dynamic beach is associated with the waterfront lands, the appropriate allowance inland to accommodate dynamic beach movement shown in 'the right - hand column.'of Table 7.1 of the document entitled "Lake..Ontario Shoreline Management Plan ", December 1990, which is available at or through the Authority at the address given in subclause (i), and (iv) 15 metres inland; (b) river or stream valleys that have depressional features associated with a river or stream, whether or not they contain a watercourse, the limits of which are determined in accordance with the following rules: (i) where the river or stream valley is apparent and has stable slopes, the valley extends from the stable top of bank, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on the opposite side, (ii) where the river or stream valley is apparent and has unstable slopes, the valley extends from the predicted long term stable slope projected from the existing stable slope or, if the toe of the slope is unstable, from the predicted location of the toe of the slope as a result of stream erosion over a projected 100 -year period, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on the opposite side, (iii) where the river or stream valley is not apparent, the valley extends the greater of, (A) the distance from a point outside the edge of the maximum extent of the flood plain under the applicable flood event standard, plus 15 metres, to 'a similar point bn the opposite side, and (B) the distance from the predicted meander belt of a watercourse, expanded as required to convey the flood flows under the applicable flood event standard, plus 15 metres, to a similar point on the opposite side; (c) hazardous lands; (d) wetlands; or (e) other areas where development could of a wetland, including areas within ] wetlands and wetlands greater than 2 metres of wetlands less than 2 hectal Permission to develop 3. (1) The Authority may grant pt described in subsection 2 (1) if, in its opi dynamic beaches, pollution or the cons development. ;velopment in or on the areas of of flooding, erosion, d will not be affected by the tion or placing of a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure. (c) site grading, (activities such as grading and excavation that would change the landform and /or natural vegetative characteristics of a site) or (d) the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere; "watercourse" means an identifiable depression in the ground in which a flow of water regularly or continuously occurs (must have a defined bed and bank); "wetland" means land that, (a) is seasonally or permanently covered by shallow water or has a water table close to or at its surface, (b) directly contributes to the hydrological function of a watershed through connection with a surface watercourse, (c) has hydric soils, the formation of which has been caused by the presence of abundant water, and (d) has vegetation dominated by hydrophytic plants or water tolerant plants, the dominance of which has been favoured by the presence of abundant water, but does not include periodically soaked or wet land,that is used for agricultural purposes and no longer exhibits a wetland characteristic referred to in clause (c) or (d). Alterations prohibited S. Subject to section 6, no person shall any way with the existing channel of a river, interfere in any way with a wetland. O. Reg. z activio) must constitute an interference in any Interference is defined as any negative impact traighten, change, 'divert or interfere in meek, stream or watercourse or change or 2/06,,s. 5: (Note: to be regulated, the way with a watercourse on wetland' on feature,or feature functions) Exceptions:;.'.- 10 No''regulation ma (a) shall limit the use (b) shall interfere respect of the subsection (1), for domestic or livestock purposes; i any rights or powers conferred upon a municipality in of water for municipal purposes; (c) shall interfere with any rights or powers of any board or commission that is performing its functions for or on behalf of the Government of Ontario; or (d) shall interfere with any rights or powers under the Electricity Act, 1998 or the Public Utilities Act. 1998, c. 15, Sched. E, s. 3 (8); 1998, c. 18, Sched. I, s. 12. (Note: interference is Attachment 2 Provincial Policy Statement Ontario is reviewing the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). The PPS provides policy direction for the entire province on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning. The current Provincial Policy Statement came into effect on March 1, 2005. Subsection 3(10) of the Planning Act states that the PPS must be reviewed every five years from the date that the PPS came into effect, to determine whether revisions are needed. Ontario has consulted extensively with municipalities, stakeholders, Aboriginal communities and organizations, and members of the public. We are now seeking your input on draft PPS policies and on the legislated five -year review period for the PPS. Provincial Policy Statement excerpts Proposed deletions are shown with a ctr -k�. Proposed 2.3 AGRICULTURE 2.3.1 Prime agricultural areas shall be p Prim e- agricultural areas a' Specialty crop areas -,I+a# shall be 2, and 3` ea. in this 2.3.2 Planning a crop areas in accordance with e developed by the Province; as amen 2.3.3 Pe 2.3.3.1 In where underlined. ng -term use for.agriculture. agricultural lands predominate. ion, followed by Canada Land ited Class 4 to 7 soils within ti areas and specialty :`tabus ed guidelines from time to time. s, permitted uses and activities are: agricultural uses, Fed uses and on -farm diversified uses. Proposed new ee.en, 645, uses and agriculture- related uses and on -farm diversified uses shall be compatible with, and shall not hinder, surrounding agricultural operations. These uses shall be limited in and er-iteFia Criteria for these uses shall be ineluded in e;N al N i.,nnin deGuments as - - -d ed may be. based on guidelines developed by the- Province; or based on municipal approaches, as set out in municipal planning documents, which achieve the same objectives. Definitions Agricultural uses: -means the growing of crops, including nursery, biomass, and horticultural crops; raising of livestock; raising of other animals for food, fur or fibre, including poultry and fish; aquaculture; apiaries; agro- forestry; maple syrup production; and associated on -farm buildings and structures, including, but not limited to livestock facilities, manure storages, value - retaining facilities and accommodation for full -time farm labour when the size and nature of the operation requires additional employment. Agri- tourism uses: means those farm - related tourism uses including limited ............ accommodation such as a bed and breakfast that promote the'`enioyment education or activities related to the farm operation. Agriculture- related uses: -means those farm - related commercial and farm - related industrial uses that are small resale a directly related to the farm operation, support agriculture, and are required inclose proximity to the farm epeFatien farm operations, and provide direct service to farm operations as an.exclusive activity. the property and help support the limited to, home occupations. hon ricultural Deletion of the term sec The term Agriculture -reh connection to he farm o Introduction of on -farm c term secondary uses. Simil additional uses must be _s strengthens the position tl to the principle agriculture I) scale uses t i:1 �condaryto the uses include, b uses. and uses ses has been modified to emphasize the direct Dn. 'sifted uses. This term appears to be a replacement for the r to agriculture related uses, it emphasizes that these Dndary to and help to support the agricultural use. It these `additional' uses must be connected yet subordinate peration.