Public meeting held on zoning amendment for oversized structure

MAPLETON – A public meeting was held on Feb. 14 for a rezoning request to permit an existing oversized accessory structure to remain on a severed parcel of agricultural land.

The proposed amendment would rezone the retained agricultural portion of a property at 6499 Wellington Road 11 to prohibit any future residential development and to permit an oversized existing accessory structure on the severed parcel.

The rezoning is a condition of a severance application for owner Timothy Schill, which has been granted provisional consent by the Wellington County land division committee.

The plan is to sever a 0.88 hectare (2.18 acre) rural residential parcel with an existing dwelling and accessory structure from an overall farm parcel of 39.3 hectares (97 acres).

“This is your typical surplus farm dwelling severance restriction on the farm parcel and then they’ve also asked to retain an existing 3,188 square foot storage shed that’s currently there as part of the farm operation,” said township planner Linda Redmond.

“So this is just satisfying a condition of consent and recognizing that oversized shed. We have no concerns.”

“Sometimes an oversized shed is too big for the lot they want severed so we ask that they remove it. And other times we give them grace and let them keep it … How does that work?” asked councillor Marlene Ottens.

“If it’s a barn, that’s usually when we might not be so keen on keeping it, because if you keep the barn then the potential of livestock is greater,” explained Redmond.

“And then when we look at the size of the structure, I will look at other structures that have been approved by council, what the historic approval rate has been and how big and that sort of thing and I kind of go on what the historical position of council has been, in this case on a two-acre parcel.”

Redmond continued, “If they were to build a brand new shop right now they would be allowed a shop that would be 2,450 square feet, so it’s not that much greater than what would have been permitted.”

She pointed out the township “has allowed new accessory structures on that size parcel through committee of adjustment, larger than that …

“If I felt that it was going beyond what is historically been supported, I would reference that in the report, so you would know.”

Council received the planning report on the proposed amendment for information.