MAPLETON – Council here recently had a lengthy discussion about a possible new rural apartment building.
The new owners of a 1.8-hectare (4.5-acre) property at 6369 Wellington Road 9 have applied for a site-specific bylaw amendment to convert a former nursing home into an apartment building with up to eight units.
Significant concerns were expressed by neighouring property owners during a public meeting about the amendment application on May 13.
As proposed, the amendment would permit converting the nursing home into five residential units, with the option of adding up to three more units in the future.
There is also a separate four-unit residential dwelling on the property that is to remain unchanged.
Mapleton planning staff have no concerns with the amendment, stating, “This proposal will add valuable affordable rural housing options [for] Mapleton residents.”
“Affordable rental housing in the rural area of Mapleton is limited. This development will be utilizing an existing building by retrofitting and adding to it to create rental units,” planners state in a report.
“This type of housing will provide valuable housing options for local residents.”
Councillor Michael Martin asked what was specifically meant by affordable, and planner Linda Redmond said “the term affordable was used in the sense that it’s rental … which is usually more affordable than home ownership.”
The lands are designated prime agricultural and zoned agriculture, with a site-specific exception allowing the nursing home (for up to 30 people including staff) and the four-unit residential dwelling.
The proposed amendment would remove the exception allowing the nursing home and instead allow the building, with an extension, to be converted into an apartment building with up to eight one- and two-bedroom units.
“Essentially the use is changing very little,” according to a township planning report.
“The property is undersized as a farm at 4.54 acres and is not likely to ever be returned to agricultural use,” the report states.
“If this was a new use being introduced then it wouldn’t meet the policies of the prime ag (designation) with a multi-residential use like that,” Redmond noted.
“Because it’s existing, the (county’s) official plan does provide for what we call status zoning – when you have a property that has a zoning on it that is not something that would be permitted under the current official plan – the local council has the authority to amend that … as long as it’s similar to what’s there.”
“In my planning opinion I feel like the use that’s being proposed is actually perhaps less [than what is currently permitted] … it will be less people living there, less conflict for the surrounding agricultural operations and it provides a great opportunity for some affordable rental accommodation in our rural area, which we all know is in high demand.
“So it’s a great opportunity to retrofit and reuse an existing building and an existing use to accommodate this type of development,” Redmond said.
While the proposed apartment building does not meet regular minimum distance separation (MDS) requirements, Redmond noted it is exempted from these requirements due to the existing site-specific exemptions for the nursing home.
Among the neighbours opposed to the amendment are Henry and Janet Verner, who submitted a letter to the township.
“Minimum distance requirements were not met 20 years ago when the original owner of the nursing home, Mr. Martin, wanted to expand,” the Verners’ letter states.
“We believe that still holds true today, and therefore expansion shouldn’t even be considered.”
“The original 100-acre parcel has already been divided into three separate packages: a residential property in the bush, a residence constructed on the middle of the 100 acres, and the nursing home … these divisions should never have been allowed in the first place,” the Verners continue.
“We believe it is council’s responsibility to continue to encourage agricultural growth without urban hindrance. A residential complex the size of the one that is being proposed will hinder the neighbouring farming operations, whether though future growth opportunities, due to such close proximity to all neighbouring farm operations or just dealing with non-farming neighbours complaining about undesirable farm practices such as spreading manure.
“Residential apartment complexes belong in an urban centre, not on prime ag land,” the Verners attest.
Jen and Jamie Joy said they own the “agricultural property that completely surrounds the nursing home property, as well as the farm immediately across the road,” and are also opposed to the amendment.
“Our primary concern just in general with a residential property adjacent to us is for our ability to intensify our agricultural uses on our own existing properties, which are zoned prime ag. land.
“We have a long established farming operation and we’d like to be able to continue with the ability to expand for future generations,” Jen said.
She suggested the retirement home/apartment building be classified as a type A land use for MDS calculations, instead of type B, to reduce the minimum setbacks required for the Joys or other neighbouring farms looking to construct agricultural buildings on their properties.
Redmond noted neighbouring farms looking to expand would already be limited by MDS, as the nursing home already exists.
“The conflict already exists. This (proposal) isn’t making it worse,” Redmond said.
She said classifying it as type A versus type B would be “a bit of a judgement call,” but the township could possibly specify in the property’s site-specific zoning that “it is to be considered a type A use for the purpose of any MDS calculations for the surrounding livestock facilities.”
Martin asked if they could “take that a step further” and make it so the neighbouring farms could completely disregard the subject property for MDS calculations.
Redmond replied, “MDS guidelines are provincially legislated and we implement them on OMAFA’s [the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Agribusiness] behalf. So I’m not sure that we have the authority to just exempt them outright.”
“You’d think there would be a reasonable way to put something legally binding on title that in the event that a farm wants to expand, MDS does not apply,” Martin said.
Mayor Gregg Davidson said the township can’t wipe out MDS completely, but suggested staff talk to OMAFA about specifying that it be considered type A, and Redmond agreed to check with OMAFA.
She will also ask OMAFA if the property can be excluded from MDS calculations for the surrounding livestock facilities.
Jen said they’re also concerned about “safety and nuisance issues for our surrounding lands due to the close proximity of this intensifying residential development to our farming operations.”
She said their concerns include increased traffic, trespassing, dumping and people – particularly children – coming into their workspace while they’re operating equipment.
While the nursing home had a maximum occupancy of 30 people, including staff, the Joys worry that significantly more people could live in the two apartment buildings.
“There’s no way to have any restrictions on the number of occupants in any dwelling unit,” Jen said. “So you may have for the 12 units proposed on the site, 12 to 24 more vehicles and a large number of different families living on the property.”
Four of the 12 units Jen referred to already exist on the property in a different building.
Jen said she understands it is not the current landowner’s intention to have a large number of people living on the property, but she’s concerned about what would happen if the property switches hands.
Since the Joys purchased their farm in 2014, Jamie said the subject property has had at least three different owners.
“Some of the owners were not local residents; it may have been more of an investment property for them. We expect that this trend may continue in the future,” Jen said.
“Who knows what the next owner is going to do – they might not have as good intentions as the intentions here tonight,” Jamie said.
Owner Randy Cramer said he understands neighbours’ concerns and attended the public meeting “to listen.”
Cramer said he’s met with the Joys a few times and talked through some of the above.
He said his ideal tenants would be older retirees who are already part of Mapleton’s community, but admitted he can’t make any promises or guarantees about who would live there.
He said the nursing home is currently empty, and two of the three apartments in the existing building have tenants.
Councillor Lori Woodham said she doesn’t understand why the nursing home was ever allowed on prime agricultural land, but as it’s already there, she’s okay with it being converted into five apartments.
But she draws the line at approving a future addition with up to three more units.
Council received the report about the application for information and staff will come back to council after discussing the MDS requirements with OMAFA.
“We’re trying to be respectful of what you’re doing and respectful of the farming operations as well,” Davidson told Cramer.
