Moved by Regional Councillor Davison
Seconded by Councillor Biggerstaff
That the Rules of Procedure be waived to permit Jason DiMambro to address Council.
Carried
Jason DiMambro, 23725 McCowan Road, indicated that his growing family would like to build another home on their 200 acre property and to continue to farm it. They have applied to do so, completed all required drawings, paid all permit fees and believe they are in compliance with Bylaw 500, but if Bylaw 600 is in effect, they will not be in compliance and all their work up to this point will become null and void. Mr. DiMambro requested;
- Bylaw 500, Section 6.1.k should be included in Bylaw 600 that allows for two single family dwellings to be on a larger 200 acre property
- Bylaw 600, Section 6.2.b(4), increase percentage for size of accessory dwelling from 40% to 50% or 55% so the main dwelling does not need to be an excessive size to permit a 150 square metre or 1,500 square foot accessory dwelling on the same property
- Bylaw 600, Section 6.2.b(2), strike out or remove 'located in the front yard', a new or accessory dwelling should be located in the front yard, similar to other large farm properties
- has been issued a demolition permit but not yet issued a building permit because the existing farmhouse is still standing; he cannot displace his family by demolishing the existing family home before confirming that a building permit is issued to construct the replacement dwelling
Moved by Councillor Genge
Seconded by Councillor Dale
RESOLUTION NO. C-2024-0232
That the delegation provided by Jason DiMambro expressing concerns with Countryside Zoning Bylaw 600 as it relates to the ability to build an additional single detached dwelling on his property be received.
Carried
Tolek Makarewicz;
- follow-up respecting provisions related to agriculture and environmental provisions in the Countryside Bylaw 600 identified on November 15, 2023 for further assessment
- reviewed key issues, consultation and notice requirements, planning policy framework, agriculture-related uses, on-farm diversified uses, jurisdictional scan, temporary accommodations for seasonal farm workers, environmental protection zone flexibility and next steps
- Options to address agriculture-related and on-farm diversified uses; Option 1- Do not permit them as-of-right and require an amendment for all proposals, Option 2 - Permit the uses as-of-right in the AP and RU-C zones, Option 3 - Hybrid approach which would permit some uses as-of-right and require Planning approval for others
- Zoning Bylaw 600 approved by Council but appealed to the Board and is therefore not yet in effect
- staff can consider housekeeping amendments
- additional residential dwelling units on a property are not intended to be permanent single detached dwellings
- three dwelling units are permitted; a single detached dwelling, an accessory apartment within that single detached dwelling and an accessory dwelling of a certain size but not as large as the main dwelling
- 40% requirement is to ensure the additional residential units are secondary to the primary building and do not become the main building
- additional dwelling units are secondary to the principle use and are not permitted in the front yard similar to other accessory buildings or structures, which is a general provision common among other municipalities
- permitting two dwellings on one lot has been accommodated historically via a temporary agreement and can be considered
Council;
- consider implementing a building envelope size as opposed to square metre percentage maximum for accessory dwellings
- consider if a square metre percentage for building size is equitable or necessary
- consider more restrictions for agriculture-related uses
- consider permitting two single detached dwellings on larger properties of 100 acres or more to create a family 'compound'
Denis Beaulieu indicated that staff will investigate the current application, along with Council's comments, determine any resolutions and report back to Council.
Moved by Councillor Neeson
Seconded by Councillor Dale
That the Council meeting recess at 8:25pm
Carried
The Council Meeting reconvened at 8:35pm
Discussion occurred concerning issues such as building in an Environmental Protection area, zone flexibility, the process followed for amendments requested by Council, fees, timing and lots of record.