MAPLETON – Minor variances near Glen Allan and Drayton have been approved to permit additions to each property.
The minor variances were approved during a public committee of adjustment meeting on May 13.
Local property owners, senior township staff and applicable agencies were notified of the public meeting on April 28, and notice was posted on each property.
Councillor Lori Woodham chaired the committee of adjustment meeting and said that for both applications, the committee finds the variances are minor in nature; desirable for the appropriate development or use of lands, buildings or structure; and maintain the general intent and purpose of the official plan and zoning bylaw.
7862 Wellington Rd. 45
The owners of this property outside Glen Allan are planning to build a new chicken barn and manure storage area.
They’ve applied to the township with a minor variance application because the proposed layer barn is does not meet the minimum distance separation from the Glen Allan hamlet boundary or from the nearest residence.
The proposed barn is 250 metres away from Glen Allan, whereas the minimum setback required is 346 metres.
The barn would be 161 metres from the nearest residence, whereas the minimum setback required is 173 metres.
The property is 36 acres (14.5 hectares) and is occupied by a dwelling and farm operation.
“Staff have no concerns with the relief requested and are of the opinion that the variances would maintain the general intent and purpose of the official plan and zoning bylaw and would be desirable and appropriate for the development of the subject property,” township planners state.
Planner Linda Redmond said “there is a cemetery across the road which is not included in their application, but I noticed when I was doing my calculations that it doesn’t meet the setback.”
“The cemetery is a closed cemetery, so there are no potential conflicts there, but we still have to include it,” she noted.
The setback from the cemetery is 138 metres, compared to the minimum 173 metres required.
No members of the public spoke for or against the application.
Councillor Marlene Ottens asked why the barn couldn’t be built further away from the hamlet, neighbouring home, and cemetery.
Consultant Gary Van Ankum, who spoke on behalf of property owner Lester Metzger, noted the minimum distance separation can’t be met “because of the lay of the land – it just doesn’t make sense to build down in the hollow.”
He said to Ottens, “You as a farmer yourself know how a farmstead works – you don’t scatter your buildings all over your land unless you absolutely have to, and I don’t think you should have to do that in this situation.”
Woodham said she went for a drive the evening before the meeting to check out the property and she understands “exactly what you’re mentioning with this.”
94 Wellington St. N.
The property owner here has plans to construct an addition onto an existing residence near Drayton.
This requires a variance because the property is zoned industrial, which does not permit residential use.
The existing residential building is permitted because it pre-dates the industrial zoning, “so it’s what we call ‘legal non-confirming,’” Redmond said.
The owner is asking to enlarge the existing legal non-conforming use.
The addition would also require relief from the required interior side yard setback minimum of three metres to allow a 1.2 metre setback.
The minimum setback is three metres because of the industrial zoning, Redmond noted – if it were zoned residential the 1.2 metre setback would meet requirements.
“We have no concerns with the request,” Redmond said. “It is adjacent to the industrial use, however it’s the same ownership, so the conflict at this point in time really doesn’t exist.
Mapleton council has approved minor variances at two different properties, allowing the construction of a chicken barn near Glen Allan (left) and a residential addition near Drayton (right).
Image from council meeting agenda
“Usually when we have legal non-conforming use the intent is that we want to see that use removed and … the zoning brought into compliance,” Redmond said.
“But in this case, the house is existing, it’s in good shape, it’s not going to be removed anytime soon. So we have no concerns with the addition at this point in time, or the reduced setback.”
Property owner Scott Nieuwland said the addition is for his parents, as his father is 80 years old and having them closer to the operations will mean his mother is “less tied down.”
The addition will be easy to access for vehicles and potential wheelchairs, he noted.
“And we own both properties and won’t ever split them apart because one is downhill from the feed mill,” he added.
No one from the public spoke for or against the application.
Mayor Gregg Davidson said the proposal is “a perfect fit for the Nieuwland family” and he thinks it should go ahead.
