HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-87-86 am)
TOWN OF NEWCASTLE
€ � t' REPORT File # 165
Res. #
r �� -�• By-Law #
SING: General Purpose and Administration Committee
DATE: Monday, April 7, 1986
REPORT #: PD-87-86 FILE #: Pln 28.1
SUBJECT: PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT ON FOODLAND PRESERVATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PD-87-86 be received; and
2. THAT the Ministry of Agriculture and Food be advised that the Town of Newcastle
supports the Provincial Government's proposed Policy Statement on Foodland
Preservation; and
3. THAT a copy of this Report and Council 's decision be forwarded to the Ministry of
Agriculture and Food, Foodland Preservation Branch, and the Region of Durham.
BACKGROUND:
On February 7, 1986, the Town of Newcastle received a letter from the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and the Minister of Agriculture and Food, forwarding a copy of the
Provincial Government' s proposed Policy Statement on Foodland Preservation (copy attached
hereto) and requesting that comments on the Policy Statement be forwarded to the Ministry
of Agriculture and Food by April 30, 1986.
. . .2
REPORT NO.: PD-87-86 Page 2
The proposed Policy Statement has been issued under the Authority of Section
3 of The Planning Act which provides for the Minister of Municipal Affairs,
together with any other Minister of the Crown, to issue policy statements on
matters relating to municipal planning that are of provincial interest.
Section 2(a) of the Planning Act identifies as a matter of Provincial
Interest "the protection of the natural environment, including the
agricultural resource base of the Province". The Minister is required to
confer with those bodies, including municipalities, which may have an
interest in the proposed statement. The proposed Policy Statement has been
issued jointly by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Ministry of
Agriculture and Food and is intended to replace the Foodland Guidelines
approved by the Provincial Cabinet in 1978.
COMMENT:
Staff have reviewed the proposed Policy Statement on Foodland Preservation
and note that it is very similar in most respects to the Foodland Guidelines
in that it seeks to preserve a land area which would be available for
agriculture on a long term basis and within which agricultural activity can
occur with a minimum of disruption from competing or incompatible uses. As
with the Foodland Guidelines, the policies of the new Policy Statement would
not apply to agricultural lands which have been designated for urban use in
previously approved Official Plans. What the proposed policy does, however,
is provide a much clearer statement on provincial policy as it relates to
the preservation of agricultural land.
The most significant difference in Provincial policy as defined by the new
Policy Statement is the policy on farm-related rural severances. The
Foodland Guidelines permit farm-related severances under the following
circumstances:
1. if both severed and retained parcels are to be used for
agriculture and are of an appropriate size;
2. technical or legal reasons such as boundary adjustments which do
not create a separate lot;
3. disposal of a dwelling which has been rendered surplus due to farm
consolidation;
4. a retirement lot for a farmer;
5. a residential lot to accommodate full-time farm help.
. . .3
REPORT NO.: PD-87-86 Page 3
The severance policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan for the
Agricultural and Major Open Space designations reflect the above provisions
of the Foodland Guidelines.
The new Provincial policy as stated in the Policy Statement would be to
permit severances on prime agricultural land only if both the retained and
severed lots are to be used for agriculture or if the severance is for
technical or legal reasons (Points 1 and 2 as outlined above) . The new
Policy would restrict the creation of residential lots, including
farm-related residential lots. The Policy, however, would permit the
severance of a dwelling rendered surplus by farm consolidation provided the
minimum separation distance is met between the proposed lot and any
livestock operations, and the lot size is kept to a minimum.
The new Provincial policy on farm-related severances would have a
substantial impact on the severance policies of the Durham Regional Official
Plan should the Policy Statement on Foodland Preservation, as currently
proposed, be approved by the Provincial Cabinet. The Official Plan would
require amendment to restrict the circumstances under which farm-related
severances could occur. Of particular significance is that severances to
create residential lots for retiring farmers or for a member of a farmer's
immediate family would no longer be permitted.
The Policy Statement notes that non-farmers purchase lots created for
farm-related purposes and may create problems for surrounding farm
operations. Given that it is the intent of both Provincial Policy and the
policies of the Durham Regional Official Plan to encourage and preserve
agricultural operations, Staff support further restrictions on the number of
residential lots which may be created in the areas of prime agricultural
land or areas exhibiting characteristics of ongoing agriculture.
It is therefore recommended that the Ministry of Agriculture and Food -
Foodland Preservation Branch be advised that the Town of Newcastle supports
. . .4
REPORT NO.: PD-87-86 Page 4
the Provincial Government's proposed Policy Statement on Foodland
Preservation.
Respectfu y gbmitted,
T.T. Edwards, M.CA.P.
Director of Planning
JAS*TTE*j i p
Attach.
March 26, 1986
i
I
I
,o.
Ontarl
Ministry of Ministry'of�
Municipal Agricult6re
Affairs and Food ` f D i'+;
F 7
( ]9�
I i
r EB 7 1986
February 4 , 1986 "' . , ,„ .. :.,� ,-tE
-
To _:
C�
PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT ON FOODLAND PRESERVATION
UNDER THE PLANNING ACT
TO ALL MUNICIPALITIES:
We are pleased to enclose a copy of the proposed
Foodland Preservation Policy Statement for your
information and comments.
For some years, municipalities have generally accepted
the principles and approach of the Foodland Guidelines .
With the revision of the Planning Act in 1983 , a new
legislative basis for provincial policy on land use was
established.
Under section 3 of the Planning Act 1983 , the Province
may issue policy statements on matters of land use
planning that apply beyond any one municipality . The
statements are to deal with matters that relate to the
Province ' s responsibility for protecting the overall
public interest , and must be considered by
municipalities in carrying out their planning functions.
At the same time , the Ontario Municipal Board,
provincial ministries and agencies are also required by
the legislation to "have regard to" such statements in
carrying out their planning responsibilities .
This proposed statement on foodland preservation is now
being released for public comment, as required by the
Planning Act, before being forwarded to Cabinet for
approval . Comments will be welcomed until April 30 ,
1986 .
/2
y
_ 2 _
We are very pleased that the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario has agreed to co-ordinate an
overall municipal response to the proposed statement.
Individual municipalities wishing to comment on this
policy are therefore requested to forward their comments
to both the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, and the
Association of Municipalities of Ontario.
The AMO response and all individual municipal responses
will be reviewed by both the Ministry of Agriculture and
Food and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs .
Association of Municipalities of Ontario
100 University Avenue
Suite 805
Toronto, Ontario
M5J 1V6
Foodland Preservation Branch
Ministry of Agriculture and Food
801 Bay Street, 8th floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5A 2B2
Your input will be important to the final review of this
proposed policy statement and we look forward to
receiving your comments .
Yours sincerely,
Bernard Grandmaitre ck R ' ddell
Minister of Municipal Affairs Minister of Agr culture
and Food
DISTRfo-UTION
CLERK---- _
Enclosure ACK. DY ----- -
C 0 i`, .. A-..,o ' 5-po eT
THE 1i1
PLANNING
ACT
t , s POLICY STATEMENT
Ontario
Foodiand
Preservatmion
A proposed policy statement
of the Government of Ontario
issued for public review
t
i
I
(I
i
i
Jack Riddell Bernard Grandmaitre
Minister of Minister of
Artirinr rl+i rro Q i=nnri Ui inininnl Affnirc 1
IMPORTANT
This proposed statement has not yet been finally approved by the Provincial Cabinet.
It is being circulated for public review and comment, as required by the Planning Act.
All comments received will be considered by Cabinet enabling revisions to be made to
the policy before it is finally approved.
Comments on the proposed policy should be addressed to:
Foodland Preservation Branch
Ministry of Agriculture & Food
8th Floor, 801 Bay Street
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 2132
by April 30, 1986.
THE PLANNING ACT 1983 - SECTION 3
3. —{1) The Minister, or the Minister together with any other minister
of the Crown, may from time to time issue policy statements that have been
approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council on matters relating to
municipal planning that in the opinion of the Minister are of provincial
interest.
' (2) Before issuing a policy statement, the Minister shall confer with such
municipal, provincial, federal or other officials and bodies or persons as the
Minister considers have an interest in the proposed statement.
(3) Where a policy statement is issued under subsection (1), the Minister
shall cause it to be published in The Ontario Gazette and he shall give or cause
to be given such further notice thereof, in such manner as he considers appro-
priate, to all members of the Assembly, to all municipalities and to such
other agencies, organizations or persons as he considers have an interest in
the statement.
(4) Each municipality that receives notice of a policy statement under
subsection (3) shall in turn give notice of the statement to each local board
of the municipality that it considers has an interest in the statement.
(5) In exercising any authority that affects any planning matter,the council
of every municipality, every local board, every minister of the Crown and
every ministry, board, commission or agency of the government, including
the Municipal Board and Ontario Hydro, shall have regard to policy state-
ments issued under subsection (1). 1983, c. 1, s. 3.
FOODLAND PRESERVATION POLICY
STATEMENT
PURPOSE
This document is prepared under the authority of Section 3 of The Planning Act,and
is the Province of Ontario's policy statement on the protection of Ontario's agricultural
land base.
INTERPRETATION
This Provincial policy statement:
• is issued jointly by the Minister of Agriculture and Food and the Minister of
Municipal Affairs under The Planning Act,
• does not supercede or take priority over other policy statements issued under this
Act or any other policy approved by the Lieutenant Governor in Council for any
specific area of the Province,
• replaces the Food Land Guidelines which were approved by Cabinet in 1978.
Except in circumstances where the Provincial government decides that an important
agricultural resource is involved, this policy statement would not be applied to prime
agricultural land that has been specifically designated for urban use in previously
approved official plans.
BACKGROUND
In A Strategy.for Ontario Farmland released in April, 1976, the Province of Ontario
declared its commitment to maintain a permanent, secure and economically viable
agricultural industry in Ontario.
In 1978, the Province released the Food Land Guidelines as a Provincial policy on the
preservation of agricultural land.
This policy statement replaces the Food Land Guidelines(1978) and is intended to pre-
serve prime agricultural land and minimize conflicting land uses within agricultural
areas.
PRINCIPLES
To help ensure a healthy and productive agricultural industry in the future,the Province
is committed to preserve a land area which will be available for agriculture on a long-
term basis, and within which agricultural activity can occur with a minimum of dis-
ruption from competing or incompatible land uses.
Within this land area, the Province intends to promote the continuation of the agri-
cultural community and the infrastructure necessary for continued agricultural pro-
duction.
The Province is committed to retaining options to meet future requirements for food-
lands and food. Some land with the capability to grow crops may not be in production
because the demand for additional crops does not exist at present. Land use planning
must ensure that as much prime agricultural land as possible is kept available for
farming in order to ensure the long-term security which is essential for meeting future
food production needs.
There will continue to be demands on rural land for housing, industry, recreation,
transportation and other such uses. Some of this demand may have to be accommo-
dated on prime agricultural land, and for this reason, the policy statement establishes
criteria by which the need for locating other uses on prime agricultural land can be fully
evaluated.
DEFINITIONS
For the purposes of this policy statement, the following definitions will apply:
Specialty Crop Land means:
Land which has capability to produce such specialty crops as tender fruits
(peaches, grapes, cherries, plums), other fruit crops, tobacco, potato and
vegetable crops, greenhouse crops and crops from developed organic soil areas.
Land capability for production of specialty crops may result from:
1. Land which has special soils, or is subject to special climatic conditions, or a
combination of both,
2. A combination of farmers skilled in the production of specialty crops,and of
capital investment in related facilities and services to produce, store or
process specialty crops.
Prime Agricultural Land means:
1. Specialty crop land;
2. Land where soil Classes 1, 2, 3, and 4 predominate as defined in the Canada
Land Inventory of Soil Capability for Agriculture;
3. Land which exhibits characteristics of ongoing agriculture; or
4. Land where local market conditions permit agricultural viability where it
might not exist otherwise.
Marginal Land means:
Land where Classes 5,6 and 7 predominate, as defined by the Canada Land Inven-
tory, with the exception of any specialty crop land.
Urban means:
Cities, towns, villages and hamlets.
01 cm�
Minimum Separation Distance means:
The appropriate separation distance between livestock operations and other land
uses as determined from the Minimum Separation Distance Tables contained in
Appendix 1 of this policy statement.
1 . POLICIES FOR PRIME AGRICULTURAL
LAND
1.1 Designating Prime Agricultural Land
It is Provincial policy that:
1.1.1 Prime agricultural land as defined be placed in an agricultural designation
and be clearly identified in the official plan and on the land use schedule.
1.1.2 The agricultural designation be as large as practical and consist of predo-
minantly prime agricultural land.
1.1.3 The agricultural designation be continuous and uninterrupted by non-
agricultural designations which permit land uses incompatible with agricul-
ture. 1
1.2 Land Uses Within Designations for Prime Agricultural Land
Within designations for prime agricultural land, it is Provincial policy that:
1.2.1 The land is to be available for agricultural use on a long-term basis, and the
official plan state clearly that this is the major objective of the designation.
1.2.2 The land uses permitted include only agriculture, and land uses compatible
with agriculture.
Compatible land uses are:
1.2.2.1 Land uses directly related to agriculture and necessary in close
proximity to farm operations, and
1.2.2.2 Land uses unrelated to agriculture that can function adjacent to
agriculture without conflict, leave the land in large parcels suitable
for farming, not require building or other construction on the land,
not alter adversely topography or soils and not create pressure for
other non-agricultural use,
1.2.2.3 Woodlots and wildlife management areas which may be associated
with agriculture or may be carried on in parallel with agriculture.
1.2.3 The following land uses are incompatible with agriculture and are not
permitted in agricultural designations because of the potential for conflict
between farm and non-farm land uses, or because they compete with agri-
culture for use of land:
1.2.3.1 Subject to Section 1.3.4, rural residential uses whether by consent,
estate residential subdivision, or other means,
1.2.3.2 Conventional residential development, or other residential develop-
ment such as mobile home parks,
1.2.3.3 Institutional or public uses such as schools,churches and cemeteries
unless they are small in scale and are intended to serve the needs of
the local rural community,
1.2.3.4 Industrial or commercial uses that are unrelated to agricultural
activities,
1.2.3.5 Recreational uses such as trailer parks or golf courses.
1.2.4 The land uses described in subsections 1.2.3.2, 1.2.3.3, 1.2.3.4 and 1.2.3.5
above, may be considered on prime agricultural land only where the need
can be justified in accordance with Section 3 of this policy statement, and
the use is within a designation separate from the designation for prime
agricultural land.
1.3 Consents Within Designations for Prime Agricultural Land
1.3.1 Within designations for prime agricultural land, it is Provincial policy that
consents for land severances under the Planning Act may be considered for the
following purposes:
1.3.1.1 A consent for a technical or legal reason that does not create a
separate lot; these reasons include minor boundary adjustments
(where one landowner is deeding part of his property to the adjacent
landowner), easements, rights of way, or other purposes that do not
create a separate lot.
1.3.1.2 The parcel to be severed and the parcel to be retained are both for an
agricultural use and both meet the following criteria:
1. Land parcels are sufficiently large to maintain flexibility for
future changes in size or type of farm operation;
2. Land parcels are an appropriate size for the types of agricultural
activity in the area;
3. Land parcels are proposed for a type of agricultural use(s)
suitable to the area;
4. Land parcels are viable agricultural units at the time of creation.
1.3.2 In order to prevent fragmentation of the agricultural land base, and to avoid
conflicts with normal farm activity, it is Provincial policy to restrict the
creation of residential lots, including farm related residential lots, within
designations for prime agricultural land. Non-farmers purchase such lots
and may create problems for surrounding farm operations. r
1.3.3 It is Provincial policy that official plan policies should allow for alternatives
to residential lot severances in order to provide for farm housing needs.
These alternatives would include a second residence on the farm, life leases,
retirement in nearby villages and hamlets, etc.
1.3.4 Some municipalities, however, may choose to allow farm-related residential
lots, but such lots may be permitted only for the following purpose:
�C m�
1.3.4.1 To dispose of a farmhouse rendered surplus by farm consolidation, Jj
provided that;
1.3.4.1.1 The Minimum Separation Distance is met between the
proposed lot and any livestock operations, including the
farm from which the lot is being severed,
1.3.4.1.2 The lot size is kept to a minimum.
1.3.5 It is Provincial policy that parcels of prime agricultural land that may not
presently be viable farm units on their own not be further fragmented because
they may be rented or sold to neighbouring farmers, thus increasing the
available land base in the area.
1.4 Separation Distances Between Incompatible Land Uses
It is Provincial policy that the Minimum Separation Distance be used to ensure
adequate separation between livestock operations and other land uses. This is to
protect livestock operations from complaints of odour associated with farm
practices and to allow a reasonable opportunity for expansion.*
2. POLICIES FOR MARGINAL LAND
2.1 Designating Marginal Land
It is Provincial policy to encourage the placement of marginal land in a designation
or designations separate from prime agricultural land. In addition to large blocks
of land which are predominantly marginal for agriculture, such a designation may
also include some areas which have a high level of land fragmentation or a strong
intermix of existing uses such that continued agricultural activity is not practical
within the area.
2.2 Land Uses in Designations Comprised of Marginal Land
Where municipalities wish to accommodate non-agricultural development outside
of existing urban areas, it is Provincial policy that such uses locate on marginal
land, rather than on prime agricultural land.
Agriculturally related industrial and commercial uses which do not need to be in
close proximity to farm operations could locate within this designation, as could
recreational uses such as golf courses.
Such land uses should, however, be directed away from prime agricultural land
within or adjacent to the designation, and agriculture should be a permitted use
within the designation.
2.3 Separation of Land Uses
It is Provincial policy that land uses proposed on marginal land that are
incompatible with agricultural activity:
• be well removed from agricultural activity either by substantial distance
separation or by natural or man-made features which cfeate a sufficient buffer
to avoid potential conflicts,
*Refer to Appendix 1
• be in a designation separate from agricultural land,
• be subject to the Minimum Separation Distance as referred to in Section 1.4.
3. POLICIES FOR NON-AGRICULTURAL
DEVELOPMENT ON PRIME
AGRICULTURAL LAND
It is recognized that there will be pressures for non-agricultural development onto
prime agricultural land. Such development pressure may take the form of urban
expansion from an existing community or individual development proposals in the
agricultural area. Where non-agricultural development onto prime agricultural land is
considered, it is Provincial policy that all of the following policies be applied:
3.1 General Policies
3. 1.1 Where prime agricultural land has been identified, the use of this land for
productive agricultural purposes be given priority in evaluating alternative
land uses. Specialty crop land be accorded highest priority,followed by Class
1, 2, 3 and 4 soils in descending order.
3. 1.2 Non-agricultural development be directed to urban areas, or onto marginal
land.
3. 1.3 To prevent premature commitment of prime agricultural land, the time
frame for committing land for future urban development be not more than 10
years.
3. 1.4 When non-agricultural development is proposed for prime agricultural land,
such development only be permitted if the need to use this land is justified and
such justification is documented.
3.2 Policies for Justification
3.2.1 It is provincial policy that official plans and amendments and applications
for individual developments proposed for prime agricultural land include
justification to satisfy all of the following factors in sequence:
• the necessity for the land use in the municipality or the planning area;
• the amount of land needed for the proposed use or uses;
• the reasons for the choice of location.
The extent of the documentation will vary according to the type and nature of
each proposal but will include those of the following criteria that are relevant:
3.2. 1.1 Necessity for the land use
Criteria ,
— projected population for the municipality or planning area
— demand for industrial, commercial or residential lands within the
municipality or planning area
— amount of growth allocated by broader studies such as county,
regional or provincial studies
— need based on public health, or safety reasons
3.2. 1.2 Land area needed
Criteria
c
— amount of existing vacant land already designated for this
purpose
G
— potential for infilling existing areas
— land area calculated on the basis of population increase to be
accommodated at reasonable density for the municipality or
planning area under consideration
— projection from previous rates of land consumption, where such
a projection is justified
— new information which may demonstrate the need for a land
consumption rate higher than past trends
— efficiency of servicing
3.2. 1.3 Reasons for the choice of location
Criteria
— consideration given to using marginal land and if it exists reasons
why it is unsuitable
— consideration given to prime agricultural land having compara-
tively lesser capability with specialty crop land having the highest
priority for protection followed by Class I to 4 soils in descending
order
— when alternative choices involve prime agricultural lands of the
same capability, consideration given to other priority rating
factors such as; the viability of existing farms, the continuity of
the land base, the extent of capital investment in farm buildings,
drainage systems, irrigation systems, fertility improvements,etc.
— consideration given to prime agricultural land with a decreased
value for agricultural purposes-as compared to other lands of the
same capability. Factors which may indicate a decreased value
for agriculture are the scattering of rural residential lots, or small
scale industrial or commercial uses, or recreational uses among
farms within the area
— special use that has unique locational requirements
J
— logical extension of an existing community
— existence of appropriate buffers or boundaries from adjacent
agricultural areas.
3.3. Agricultural Considerations for Urban Expansion
3.3. 1 While recognizing that urban expansion will continue to occur, it is not
desirable for all communities to expand onto prime agricultural land. Where
urban growth trends indicate the continued absorption of prime agricultural
land, it is Provincial policy that in addition to Sections 3.1 and 3.2, the
following policies apply specifically to urban expansion onto prime agri-
cultural land:
3.3.1.1 Official plans indicate which municipalities or urban areas within
their boundaries will be encouraged to expand, 4�
3.3.1.2 Consideration be given to increased urban densities, redevelopment
or infilling of existing urban areas, or redirection of proposed
development onto marginal land, as alternatives to expansion onto
prime agricultural land,
3.3.1.3 Hamlets located in areas of prime agricultural land primarily be
defined as small centres servicing the rural community, within which
substantial growth, in relation to the size of the hamlet, will not be
encouraged,
3.3.1.4 Development of existing vacant lands within urban areas occur
before outward expansion onto prime agricultural land,
3.3. 1.5 Urban growth take place as a logical extension of existing
development,
3.3.1.6 The boundaries of the urban areas be defined for the life of the plan
where they abut prime agricultural land, by using clearly identifiable
natural or man-made features, where the location of such features
forms a logical boundary to contain the area of urban expansion that
is justified,
3.3. 1.7 Designations which allow strip development into agricultural areas
be avoided.
3.3.2 It is recognized that there may be existing haphazard or scattered develop-
ment on prime agricultural land adjacent to urban areas. Such areas may also
exhibit ownership by non-farmers and inflated land prices. However,
because sufficient area for urban expansion will have been provided within
the urban designations, haphazard-or scattered urban development should
not be permitted. The policies of the agricultural designation should be
applied and continued agricultural production should be encouraged.
4. POLICIES FOR MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
ADJUSTMENTS ON PRIME
AGRICULTURAL LAND
i
4.1 It is the intent of the Provincial government that priority be given to the preserva-
tion of prime agricultural land when municipal annexations are being considered
under the provisions of the Municipal Boundary Negotiations Act.
In this regard, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food will be consulted by the
Municipal Boundaries Branch during fact-finding inquiries as set out in Section
4(1) of the Municipal Boundary Negotiations Act.
5. POLICIES FOR MINERAL AGGREGATE
EXTRACTION ON PRIME AGRICULTURAL
LAND
The following policies apply in conjunction with the Policy Statement on Mineral
Aggregate Resources. Reference should also be made to that policy statement.
5.1 The Province of Ontario recognizes five important areas of specialty crop lands
that also have aggregate potential. These are; an area around Harrow and an area
around Leamington in Essex County, an area in the vicinity of King's Highway 3
south of Blenheim in Kent County, an area of the Niagara Region and the
Meaford-Thornbury area in Grey County. Refer to Appendix 2, Figures 1-4.
5.2 It is Provincial policy that mineral aggregate extraction, including wayside pits and
quarries, only be permitted on specialty crop land in the areas noted in 5.1 if
documentation is provided to reasonably show that:
5.2.1 The site can lie rehabilitated for agriculture to allow production of the same
hectarage of the same specialty crops at the same level of productivity, and
5.2.2 There will be no deleterious effect on microclimate upon which the area may
be dependent for specialty crop production.
5.3 On other specialty crop land, and Class 1 to 3 soils according to the Canada Land
Inventory, mineral aggregate extraction, including wayside pits and quarries, may
occur if rehabilitation of the site is carried out and substantially the same hectarage
and soil capability for agriculture are restored.
6. POLICIES FOR CONSTRUCTING PUBLIC
FACILITIES ON PRIME AGRICULTURAL
LAND
6.1 It is the intent of the Provincial government that priority be given to the preserva-
tion of prime agricultural land when proposals to construct transportation,
communication, sanitation and other such public facilities are being considered
under the provisions of The Environmental Assessment Act, The Ontario Energy
Board Act and other applicable legislation. It is Provincial policy that:
6.1.1 Where public facilities are proposed for construction on prime agricultural
land the need to use this land be justified as outlined in Section 3 of this policy
statement.
6.1.2 Where the need to use prime agricultural land for constructing a public
facility is justified, siting and construction of the facility should be carried
out in a manner which will minimize the impact of the facility on prime
agricultural land and farming practices.
IMPLEMENTATION
In exercising any authority that affects any planning matter, the council of every
municipality, every local board, every Minister of the Crown and every Ministry,board,
commission or agency of the government, including the Municipal Board and Ontario
Hydro, shall have regard to policy statements issued under The Planning Act, as
required by Section 3 of the Act.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Food, within the context of its mandate to preserve
agricultural land at the provincial level will:
• provide comments to planning review and approval agencies on proposed plan-
ning actions that may have implications for the preservation of agricultural land
using the policy statement as the basis for review,
• make representations or provide technical expertise to the Ontario Municipal
Board or other Boards as warranted when the preservation of agricultural land is
at issue,
• consult as appropriate with other Ministries, public agencies,local authorities and
municipalities on matters pertaining to the preservation of agricultural land,
• prepare guidelines as appropriate to assist in implementing this policy statement.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Food and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs will jointly
administer this policy statement, as well as advise and explain its content and application to
municipalities and other planning agencies.
Existing approved official plans and zoning by-laws shall be considered with regard for
this policy statement at such time as they come up for review.
APPENDIX 1—MINIMUM SEPARATION DISTANCE
PURPOSE
The Minimum Separation Distance is a planning tool to reduce conflicts between
livestock farms and other uses by providing a set-back distance appropriate to the size
and type of livestock operation and the characteristics of the neighbouring land use.
BACKGROUND
Livestock operations may at certain times of the year and under certain weather condi-
tions produce odours to which neighbours may object. All livestock operations require
proper siting, management, and protection from encroachment by non-compatible
neighbouring uses.
CONCEPTS
The following method to obtain a Minimum Separation Distance was developed from
the Minimum Distance Separation Formulas in the 1976 Agricultural Code of Practice.
Revisions take into account experience with the use of the Formulas in numerous field
situations. Tables provide a base distance and permit easy comparison of the minimum
separation distance for different livestock and land use situations.
The system includes the following features:
• different livestock types equated in terms of a livestock factor related to odour
intensity
• separate tables provided for a proposed land use change and for a proposed
livestock facility change
* fully reciprocal tables; the same distance for a new livestock barn locating
adjacent to an existing house,and for a new house locating adjacent to an exist-
ing livestock barn.
• three steps to obtain the appropriate separation distance.
Step 1 — Total Livestock Units
The Livestock unit equates different livestock types based on their relative odour
intensity.
The "Livestock Inventory" is the worksheet which is used in Step 1. It lists the different
types of common farm animals covered by the Minimum Distance Tables. The live-
stock unit is determined by the housing capacity of the barn, or the number of livestock
the barn could accommodate according to its design, not the actual number of animals
in the barn at the time of the evaluation. The total livestock units for all the animals on
the property in question are used in Step 2 to enter the appropriate Table.
Step 2 — Distance
There are two tables for calculating the base distance. The one appropriate to the land
use situation being evaluated is selected. Table 1, applies to the proposed location of a
new non-farm use adjacent to an existing livestock barn.Table 2,applies to a change in a
livestock barn in relation to an existing land use.
Step 3 — Minimum Distance
I The minimum distance varies according to the type of land use adjacent to a livestock
facility. Land use categories in the tables are generalized according to commonly
accepted terminology. For land uses which are more likely to be found in the rural area
and are consequently less sensitive to livestock operations, the base distance is also the
minimum distance. Land uses which are sensitive to odours from livestock agriculture
have a land use factor accorded them which is greater than the base distance.
In Table 2 guidance on distances is also given for the location of a livestock building on a
farm property. Land use factors are given for the nearest lot line, the edge of the road
allowance, and the nearest lot line on an existing vacant lot.
When the tables are incorporated into planning documents, municipalities may wish to
tailor the headings to their own terminology or zone categories.
LIVESTOCK INVENTORY
STEP 10 TOTAL LIVESTOCK UNITS
Col. 1 Col. 2 Col. 3 Col. 4 Col. 5 Col. 6 Col. 7
1
TYPE OF DESCRIPTION LIVESTOCK EXISTING EXISTING HOUSING LIVESTOCK
LIVESTOCK UNITS HOUSING LIVESTOCK CAPACITY UNITS AFTER
Per CAPACITY UNITS AFTER CHANGE
Animal Number of Col. 3 x CHANGE Col. 3 x
Animals - Col. 4 Number of Col. 6
Animals
BEEF Feeders 0.90
CATTLE (400-1100 lb)
Feeders 0.45
(400-750 lb)
Feeders 0.90
(750-1100 lb)
Beef Cow 1.80
(Includes Calf)
CHICKENS Broilers 0.002
Roasters 0.003
(4-5 lb)
Laying Hens 0.008
(Floor Housing)
Laying Hens 0.015
(Ca ed)
Pullets 0.002
DAIRY Dairy Cow* 1.0
CATTLE (Includes Calf)
Milking Cow** 1.5
DUCKS Processing 0.002
FOXES Females*** 0.17
GOATS Females*** 0.70
HORSES 0.50
MINK Females*** 0.05
RABBITS Females*** 0.04
SHEEP Ewes Including 0.12
Lambs to Market
Feeder Lambs 0.08
SWINE Feeder Hogs*** 0.60
(40-200 lb)
Sows Includes 0.85
Litter to Wean
TURKEYS Heavy Toms 0.008
(30 lb)
Heavy Hens 0.007
(20 lb)
Broilers 0.01
(12_1b)
Breeding 0.008
Flocks
VEAL (70-300 lb) 0.35 a
CALVES
TOTAL LIVESTOCK UNITS
* total dairy herd capacity
Use in Table 1 Use in Table 2
** total lactating cows Use in Table 2
(includes dry cows, heifers, calves)
*** includes associated males and offspring
AAAA for farrow to finish, total the livestock
BETWEEN A NEW NON-FARM USE AND A LIVESTOCK BARN ��m)
TOTAL
STEP D LIVESTOCK
UNITS Col. 5 STEP O MINIMUM DISTANCE*(METRES)
(Enter table) (Select appropriate land use)
Col. 8 Col. 9 Col. 10 Col. 11
Tillahle Area on Livestock Units NON-,FARM LANG USE
�diacent farm (Col. S, Fig. 1) Residential Use**_ nstjtuti5aT7 e
(hectares) Equals livestock Industrial Use Commercial Ilse
factor X existing Agricultural-Commercial Use Estate Residential Use
housing capacity Agricultural-Industrial Use Recreational Use
Orderly expansion of an
urban area
90
0.5 2 50 99
0.7 3 S7 115
0.9 4 63 127
1.2 5 69 137
154
2.3 10 87 175
3.5 15 101 201
4.7 20 111 223
5.8 25 120 241
7.0 30 128 -S6
8.2 35 135 271
9.4 40 142 284
105 45 148 296
11..8 SO 153 307
12.9 55 159 317
14.1 60 163 327
15.3 6S 168 336
16.5 70 173 34S
17.6 7S 177 353
18 8 80 181 36
20.0 85 185 369
90 188 377
95 192 384
100 195 391
110 20Z 0
120 208 417
130 214 429
140 220 440
150 225 451
160 230 401
170 23S 471
180 240 480
190 24S 489
200 249 498
210 253 507
220 2S8 515
230 262 523
240 266 S31
250 269 539
260 Z73 S46
270 277 SS3
280 280 561
290 284 S67
300 287 574
340 300 600
400 318 63S
S00 343 687
600 366 732
700 386 772
800 40S 809
1000 438 87S
1200 466 933
1500 504 1009
2000 SS8 1115
Z500 603 06
3000 643 1286
3500 678 1357
4000 711 1422
5000 769 1537
* For a new lot, measure from the barn to the nearest boundary.
For a new building on an existing lot, measure from the barn
to the nearest wall.
** Residential refers to single residences on adjacent lots
`Jom
C) twn G7Z fy
c cD D� cy
as
� d Z C m�
m� o
00
X-I
70 €
c
4
(U�,
i
_oo
2 r
o m
m M
o x
c
N
1: S
� o
I
m
m
co
C
F
0
Z
ry G)
10=
-.0
m z
o 0
rvm
9 F
nm
oz
�r
o m
n�
v0
o
n�
c
°z
K
L O
Do
DD
m
K
O
0
m
r
r
Z
G)
x
z
0
z
m
m
m
z
r
m
0 O
O
x
c
z
o_ o
D r
= r
M <
M m
o x
c
N
oll
Z
m
O
0
m
O
z
U)
z
O
m
x
4
z
6)
r
m
O
O
x
0
c
co
z
c�
D
D
n
O rev
0W Cr-I
Fn D O
zm ���
m 0
O O
w w
r r
(I) CD
0 0
0 0
C C
_ _
O y
D OD
CD
(D Q
^1
lJ c
w ?
= w
0 0
�I Cn
r CO -i
zmmZca
c m m
m m N
CnDW
rm
< D
i Di
05
Z
Z Z
z 0
Z
0
m Z
M
zm
G) ..
IN
n O
wmm 0
cn
-m m 0—
` 00 r
z0
of C Oz
0 z
TOTAL
LIVESTOCKUNITS.BEFORE
PROPOSED
CHANGE(FROM COL.5)
gggg
8888
y
gun
mn
aoYS"n!'�gSoo
6002to
8xxxs��exsx�>s�`r oW�IJt2 no-, IoW""�
.....,.....
. ...,...o
__ __________
..... 00000
________
00000
______ _______ _______
00000 00000 00000..... ....M
0000!0000
000
000
0000!00000
000
000 0000 0000 .....i...Nv "
00000
00000
00000;00000
00000
00000 00000 000 ----- oo.��W W
0000
0000
000010000
0...01.0000
of oo.0.I
0000
000 000 000 000 0>✓m9�i
00.. 0.00
...........
000
...o.
000
00000
.o. 000
.....�......
000
0000.
000 0000(0000 000 e-,�
..... .....�....a
€n
0 0!.
0 0..
000.
..0
0 .
0 .
000
0
00001...0
0 0
0
0 .
0... ...0
. ...oi0000 o.
0 0 0.0
.0000
0000.
00..0
00000
0.000+00.00
000 00
.0000 00000 0..o0�o�aWP
..... .....
..... ..... ..... .....
....0
..0.. o...
00000�000.0
00.0
!
...0
00000
...
00000 i
...
00000' 0
.0.
00000!00000
!
0000 ,
I
0 .
000 ...... aoW v;,�,v.o
0.000!.....!....0
.....
000.0 0....
.0...
J
....0�.0.00�0�����°� ;,�;
. . .
000
0000 i
0000. .
..o
..
.i. .i.
. .,.
000 ' 000
------g
o►o.mx°;�°W»; Pig -�
Pm,mPaPm,N
. .
.,.
.000 w �
''
00.00
.o.o.
.0000
00.00;
!
000.0i....0!.0..0�0oo..imva
___1
°°I.:om a r
.....t..... .....,.....,..
...1.....!.....1....o!�a��.
-!�� �, amp ___--,
I
.i.....1....0�....
..ffi°o°.I
.a..l....olo...0�0...
... ....�.....Im
°°m=i a�SW0 P;5:5� D
.0000E
i
..... .i.
oiP��mW�g
€oPW � i�aaam � �
51 gP m � �xaam
WO �
!
00000
a0000�
0000.
�
����a!��o�W;��v��i�.«
...
.�"m!
«<
0
00
al s o
.1.00001
t
I
� vPWW
`�zNOlew&wwi
�m,"W;�w�" .`.�Ia T
0 0000
000 a
..0.00000
0.0.0� �W ,`
�mS»dw!
m.�p23I'�� o�w.�"awmel��."`��."`a�."`a."`o o�?� O
000
i .00 !
00.01000.
��NI
����� "��al`-��WWiWWwwW! Wto 00
0..
� =+2''! ���I mminl�mi—2 r
000
0.0.'
0000
000
00�k, Py~JX'i
J$��°
m� kWmvyl
...
...
.....�.....
...
. .
. '�
a;oZz zWmao
�P wa���
, t
a "a m"aaa,PPPPPt
. .
...
1
-mo
...
...
...
...w
W _ 3W
°,� �W�!x�
s 3E����W
�y�N�W
�i
xina oi�nm�Inn!n nlj
...
...
...
..
�N
um;mni�o�r�la�«m'�
0000
000.a
00o
aoWS
SS$om ��
,"'�v�"Vf>I
v J1 2t�of �ml NN",- 9"3 X31 "�,g2 i 8
"�gs?�i#vm
MN
ma iZm a asMiaaaao�gun
....�.....I...�
..�
vNe3a
mW§�
s
a �TM�
M��
Ml Wammmim�mm �m�m��mm��is
W� fi
.N t-
-WW ----���Ww-- ---- ---
V w' w
a
....�....
.w a�1Mv
?aINa 5 5o
inn
aaaaa aaaaa�nnaa aaaaa�aaaaa
000.0�0000o
WN a�
oee
tiC oN� =ate
s =
�aaaaa� as aaP P aaUg aaoR
000
,"'o`e
vaa a
aoW mn
mg§
mm IlI§MA 5059 MMIMB 8
0..
MAH
Z.'.! al�a�
YG
'ffi15 mivkn'm� W bt"m ko m m Gi�
'nm
azzu
mgn aaaaa
aaaaat
aaaaa�mu aaaaa aaaaa�aaaaa �
...�1
—m
...o'
N+!§
MTV
UM
"saava MU
9
HUH MU M,-4
V.Hm
I
mmS W
sSSSB HAM
W w w
ssSSS
HEM
SSSSS�mnm asses smm SSmS
W w�WWWWw
000
oo �
�=
',£WSg
F2`;S3
TSS$Y 2YW SS
YS2S€
TTTTT TTTTT TTTTV T1.g<i���:€�
onvc
.Ng��
Ns-"
941SES
a>oa 53-M.,
aaa
m vvmmo�Hgaa!° H Vim",7 11
_oo
2 r
o m
m M
o x
c
N
1: S
� o
I
m
m
co
C
F
0
Z
ry G)
10=
-.0
m z
o 0
rvm
9 F
nm
oz
�r
o m
n�
v0
o
n�
c
°z
K
L O
Do
DD
m
K
O
0
m
r
r
Z
G)
x
z
0
z
m
m
m
z
r
m
0 O
O
x
c
z
o_ o
D r
= r
M <
M m
o x
c
N
oll
Z
m
O
0
m
O
z
U)
z
O
m
x
4
z
6)
r
m
O
O
x
0
c
co
z
c�
D
D
n
O rev
0W Cr-I
Fn D O
zm ���
m 0
O O
w w
r r
(I) CD
0 0
0 0
C C
_ _
O y
D OD
CD
(D Q
^1
lJ c
w ?
= w
0 0
�I Cn
r CO -i
zmmZca
c m m
m m N
CnDW
rm
< D
i Di
05
Z
Z Z
z 0
Z
0
m Z
M
zm
G) ..
IN
"r
FIGURE 1
ESSEX COUNTY
Windsor
2
� t
Tilbury i,
,1 1
401
Comber
3
x+^ Essex
jAmherstburg 3 ,•,•,;,',�
_ 'Wbeg l Ity*:
3
B
M Harr
• l�eprrtingfori.
King*sytll
O
Specialty crop lands with restrictions for
mineral aggregate extraction
FIGURE 2
Chatham
401 KENT COUNTY
I ,
I I
I ,
40
10
Ienhemn
4
Rondeou
Harbour
Cedar
i Spnn
Erie Beach
O 3
U
N
q Lake Erie
70 Specialty crop lands with restrictions for
C mineral aggregate extraction
15
APPENDIX 2-MINERAL AGGREGATE EXTRACTION ON SPECIALTY CROP LANDS
FIGURE 3
1
NIAGARA REGION
Lake Ontario
qEW
St.Catharines
(1I
\ 1
\ 1
' JI
Niagara
Falls
i
Specialty crop lands with restrictions for
mineral aggregate extraction
Niagara escarpment Lake Erie
FIGURE 4
/Iii
1/ I GREY COUNTY
ll
111 :•22 •
11 Specialty crop lands with restrictions for
1 — mineral aggregate extraction
26 Meaford
It I 112 Niagara escarpment
:• .'I 4
• f2 :l
--- - r.N
DlD EAD dlJEfl
26
•'i
Thornbury
11, 2
1
4 i�����_
EEpyER it
1 �
/. I
111, ••:. •,1 ` `i
1 1
11 1
1
For further information contact:
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE & FOOD:
Foodland Preservation Branch
801 Bay Street
8th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M7A 2B2
416-965-9433
MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS
Office of Local Planning Policy
777 Bay Street
13th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5G 2E5
416-585-6229
w J
,j
Additional copies of this publication may be obtained from local offices of the
Ministry of Agriculture & Food and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs (Community
Planning Advisory Branch).