Council clips small lots clause from Agriculture District review

By Kirk Starratt

kstarratt@kentvilleadvertiser.ca

NovaNewsNow.com

Allowing residential development on small lots in the Agricultural District was not a popular idea among many county residents, and the municipal council has removed the clause from proposed review amendments.

Second and final reading of Municipal Planning Strategy (MPS) and Land Use Bylaw (LUB) amendments proposed by the agricultural working group was scheduled for the Tuesday, Aug. 5 council session. The agricultural review has been in the works for about three years.

Coun. John Fuller, however, made a motion to remove the section that would permit development on small lots less than 4.5 acres in size in the Agricultural District created for non-farm residential development before May 1, 2008. This clause could have opened 385 lots in the Agricultural (A1) Zone to development, in addition to 892 building lots grandfathered in 1994.

Fuller said information from planners indicates that the clause would have placed more than 2,000 acres of farmland at risk of non-agricultural development.

“This really would do more damage than anything that came before council in the last eight years,” he said.

Municipal solicitor Don Urquhart said removing the clause would be a substantial amendment requiring a return to first reading.

Coun. Madonna Spinazola said she wants to follow the MPS and move people to growth centres. Fuller said the small lots clause is totally against the MPS.

Clear message from public

Coun. Chris Parker said council heard loud and clear at the public hearing regarding the agricultural review amendments that people don’t want the small lots clause. He pointed out that he also was prepared to make a motion to remove the section.

Parker said a couple councillors have information from a recent conference to share that could help shed light on the matter. He suggested giving councillors time to make their presentation so the final vote on the agricultural review could be held in October.

Coun. Barry Peterson said the decision should be a no-brainer for those councillors who attended the public hearing.

Coun. Ted Palmer said 4.5 acres is too much land to call a small lot and it never should have gone that far. He said if council defeats the small lot clause and doesn’t replace it with anything, council would have to continue to go on a case-by-case basis and people would be spending a lot of money on agrologist reports.

Palmer agreed with removing the clause but hoped the matter will be revisited at some point.

Council carried Fuller’s motion to remove the small lot section.

Community Development Services director Bill Butler said there is a lot of good in the agricultural review document and cautioned councillors not to reopen the matter too broadly or they could find themselves in the midst of another review.

Fuller suggested giving first reading to the amended agricultural review without the small lot section and then hearing the information councillors have to present.

Councillors agreed to hold first reading of the agricultural review amendments -- without the small lot clause -- in September. Further amendments could be made at first reading.