Elk Valley Agricultural Land Reserve Review Project

Transcription

1 R E G I O N A L D I S T R I C T O F E A S T K O O T E N A Y Elk Valley Agricultural Land Reserve Review Project August 2009

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Special thanks to the following for their expertise and contributions to the development and preparation of guidelines for the management of the Agricultural Land Reserve in the Elk Valley: Caitlin Good, RDEK Consultant Mike Malmberg, Professional Agrologist Mike Sosnowski, RDEK Director Electoral Area A Rob Veg, MCIP, RDEK Planner Agricultural Land Commission staff

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION In 2008, the Regional District of East Kootenay (RDEK), in collaboration with the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC), embarked on a pilot project to review the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) boundaries and regulations within the Elk Valley. The project had two primary objectives: 1. to identify potential ALR boundary adjustments to reflect existing land characteristics; and 2. to review land use policies and regulations to support agriculture and ALC decision-making within the project area. This report represents the RDEK s position on ALR land use management in the Elk Valley. The report specifically recommends a number of adjustments to the ALR boundary in the Elk Valley as well as amendments to ALC regulations and policies respecting subdivision and non-farm use. ALR BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENTS The ALR boundary in the Elk Valley was established in 1974 using 1:50,000 mapping and other large scale landscape features and soils information. This project represents the first detailed review of the Elk Valley ALR boundary since its inception. Not all ALR land in the Elk Valley was reviewed. Much of the valley bottom land is appropriately designated as ALR. Specific areas of interest along the ALR edge were identified by the RDEK and ALC for detailed analysis. Using existing mapping, photography and land use history in combination with field investigation of site specific land features, several options for ALR boundary adjustments have been identified for each area of interest. The results of the ALR boundary analysis will not be used for a block ALR exclusion or inclusion application. Instead, future applications from individual land owners that comply with this report will be more likely to gain RDEK support and receive a favorable decision from the ALC. ALR Land affected by this Report: Total ALR in the Elk Valley: 13,190 ha Area supported for exclusion: 1,137 ha Area supported for inclusion: 432 ha Net loss of ALR land: 705 ha ALR SUBDIVISION AND LAND USE DEVELOPMENT POLICIES The RDEK analyzed the mandate of the ALC, Elk Valley agricultural statistics, and both ALC and RDEK land use regulations and policies to produce a set of specific recommendations for ALR land use management in the Elk Vall ey. In general, the RDEK supports an expansion of permitted land uses and subdivisions in the ALR to be implemented through either a delegation agreement or a General Order of the Commission.

4 The mandate of the ALC is to preserve agricultural land and support farming. The ALC Act and supporting regulations implement this mandate. However, the regulations are very prescriptive and consequently generate many applications for non-farm use and subdivision approvals. This shifts the ALC s focus from the broader objective of preserving agricultural land and supporting farming to micro-managing land use with regulations that often duplicate or contradict local government land use planning and zoning. Based on Statistics Canada s Census of Agriculture, existing farming opportunities in the Elk Valley are at risk due to farmer demographics, small economic returns, dependence on non-farm income and lack of agricultural diversity. It is the opinion of the RDEK that the ALC and Ministry of Agriculture could be directing more resources to the broader provincial objective of supporting agriculture and local food production. Local government has been delegated the power to control land use and development, except in the ALR where additional Provincial regulations for land use and subdivision apply. This has created an overlapping set of land use regulations affecting land in the ALR. This report has identified areas where the Elk Valley Zoning Bylaw should take precedence over ALR regulations in order to rationalize the land use regulatory regime, reduce conflicting regulations, and streamline application processes. The report also examines ALR subdivision polices, local planning documents, and existing development patterns and recommends a revised set of policies for rationalizing and streamlining the management of specific types of ALR subdivision applications in the Elk Valley. CONCLUSIONS This report describes the results of an ALR boundary and policy review project for the Elk Valley region of the RDEK. Through the identification of specific areas of interest that were then subject to detailed research and field investigations, the report recommends potential ALR boundary adjustments that better reflect existing land features. The report also examines other aspects of the ALR, the state of local agriculture and applicable land use regulations to develop recommendations for managing non-farm uses and subdivisions. The report was presented at a public meeting in Hosmer on June 25, A public comment period followed the meeting. Boundary Adjustments This report makes recommendations for fine tuning the ALR boundary in several locations in the Elk Valley. In most cases, several options are presented. At the time of application by individual land owners, it is the intention of the RDEK to use this report in its review of the application. ALR Policy and Development Regulations The report outlines several non-farm uses and subdivisions that the RDEK believes should either be permitted outright, or should be controlled by local government zoning regulations and decision-making processes. In addition to the general non-farm uses and subdivisions detailed below the report identifies additional criteria to be used when reviewing applications, such as a requirement for a report from a qualified professional to help determine the potential impacts or opportunities for agriculture being generated by the proposal. Executive Summary Page 2

5 Non-Farm Uses The report recommends that the following uses be exempt from the requirement for a nonfarm use approval by the ALC: 1. Secondary suites located within detached garages. 2. Two family dwellings. 3. Temporary portable sawmills where permitted by zoning, without requiring 50% of the timber to be harvested from the property or farm where the mill is located. 4. Home based businesses in excess of the 100 m 2 subject to compliance with zoning regulations. 5. Structures accessory to parks, biodiversity conservation, passive recreation, heritage, wildlife, and scenery viewing purposes greater than 100 m 2 subject to compliance with zoning regulations. 6. Temporary storage of soil and fill where the storage does not impact the agricultural capability of the parcel. A report from a Professional Agrologist may be required at the time of application for a Temporary Use Permit to the RDEK. 7. Public utility uses (i.e. water and sewer mains, hydro and cable lines) of a residential or commercial scale, subject to the land being reclaimed to its original condition, where applicable. 8. Telecommunication equipment in excess of 100 m 2 where in compliance with zoning regulations. Subdivision The report recommends that the following subdivisions be permitted: 1. Subdivision for a relative pursuant to Section 946 of the Local Government Act and where the parcel being created minimizes the impact to the agricultural potential of the parent parcel. 2. Subdivision to create a homesite for retiring farmer where consistent with Section 946 of the Local Government Act and where the parcel being created minimizes the impact to the agricultural potential of the parent parcel. 3. Subdivision in the Cokato area where a parcel: a. is divided by a road, to a minimum of a 70%-30% split; b. is within 40% of the allowable minimum parcel size; c. meets the minimum usable site area requirements of the zoning bylaw. 4. Subdivision in the Dicken Road area where a parcel is divided by a road. 5. Subdivisions of parcels 4.0 ha (10 ac) in size or less. Executive Summary Page 3

6 6. Subdivisions of parcels where the proposal does not impact the agricultural capability of the parcel being subdivided. Criteria to be considered when reviewing applications under this provision are: a. Topographic and other constraints; b. Existing agricultural and non-agricultural land uses and infrastructure; c. Parcelization; d. Other criteria as deemed appropriate. 7. Despite having potential agricultural capability, subdivisions of parcels that demonstrate significantly limited agricultural suitability. Criteria considered when reviewing suitability are as follows: a. Existing parcel configuration; b. Access to water for irrigation; c. Access to transportation infrastructure; d. Other criteria as deemed appropriate. BENEFITS TO THE ALC AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT By adopting the recommendations of this report, the ALC will be better able to focus its resources on its broader mandate of preserving agricultural land and supporting farming. This will be achieved in the following ways: 1. Through increased confidence in the ALR boundary in areas of the Elk Valley that are subject to development pressures and competing land use interests. 2. By supporting a broader range of land uses and subdivisions on marginal lands, the ALC can concentrate on protecting high quality agricultural lands. 3. By delegating certain decision-making authorities to local government or modestly expanding the range of permitted subdivisions and land uses in the ALR, the ALC will reduce the number of applications it reviews and will be able to focus resources on other agricultural concerns. 4. The ALC will be assisting agriculture in the Elk Valley by supporting some additional non-farm economic potential in the ALR land base. 5. Streamlining and rationalizing government regulations and application processes provides immediate benefit to all levels of governments, the agricultural industry and, most importantly, local farmers and residents. RDEK RECOMMENDATIONS 1. That the ALC enter into a delegation agreement with the RDEK for non-farm uses and subdivisions in the Elk Valley as recommended in this report; or That the ALC pass a General Order approving the non-farm uses and subdivisions in the Elk Valley as recommended in this report; and 2. That the ALC accept the recommendations of this report when reviewing ALR exclusion and inclusion applications; and 3. That this report be used as a template for future ALR review projects in the RDEK. Executive Summary Page 4

7 Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION Background The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) The Regional District of East Kootenay (RDEK) Purpose Outcomes BOUNDARY REVIEW Introduction Background Scope & Methodology Study Area Definition Field Work Limitations Conclusions and Recommendations Cunliffe Road Dicken Road Fernie Shop Road Subarea Dicken Road (North) Hartley Creek Road Bryant Road Subarea Morrissey Subarea Anderson Road Subarea Vanlerberg Road Subarea Hosmer Beese Road Subarea North-West Hosmer Subarea South Sparwood Subarea North Sparwood Subarea Special Policy Areas (SPA) POLICIES Introduction Background ALC Mandate and Regulations Review Elk Valley Farming Statistics Public Input Summary Policy Direction Non-Farm Uses Subdivisions General Policies CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Page 4.1 Conclusions Boundary Review ALR Policy & Development Regulations Benefits to the ALC and Provincial Government Recommendations i

8 APPENDICES Appendix A Figures Appendix B RDEK & ALR Boundary maps Appendix C Public Comments ii Executive Summary Page 2

9 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND This report is the result of the pilot project undertaken by the Regional District of East Kootenay (RDEK) and the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) to review the Agricultural Land Reserve boundaries and policies for the Elk Valley. The report consists of two parts. Part 1 provides the results of the ALR boundary review while Part 2 is the result of the ALR policy review for the Elk Valley The Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) The ALR was established between 1974 and 1976 following the introduction of the BC's Land Commission Act on April 18, As identified by the ALC, their mission is to preserve agricultural land and encourage and enable farm businesses throughout British Columbia. Specifically, the ALC outlines its purpose is: to preserve agricultural land; to encourage farming in collaboration with other communities of interest; and to encourage local governments, First Nations, the government and its agents to enable and accommodate farm use of agricultural land and uses compatible with agriculture in their plans, bylaws and policies. The ALC has established four goals used to achieve their vision of a provincial agricultural land reserve system that fosters economic, environmental, and social sustainability. These goals are: Preservation of agricultural land; The encouragement and enabling of farm businesses; A provincial land reserve system that considers community interests; and Sound governance and organizational excellence. The Agricultural Land Commission Act and the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation established on November 1, 2002 are used to achieve the mandate of the ALC. In addition to the act and regulations, the ALC has established processes whereby landowners can apply for exclusions, subdivisions, and non-farm uses of property within the ALR The Regional District of East Kootenay (RDEK) In April 2007, the RDEK Board made a request to the Minister of Agriculture & Lands to establish a pilot project to review the ALR boundaries and policies for the RDEK. The ALC responded favourably to the proposal on behalf of the Minister that same month. A preliminary project proposal was prepared by the ALC and presented to the RDEK Planning and Building Committee for approval with the final project work plan being finalized in the spring of As part of the final work plan, the Elk Valley, a geographically distinct portion of the RDEK with a range of agricultural, topographic and climate constraints was selected as the project area. A map of the Elk Valley is attached. August 2009 Page 1 of 58

10 1.2 PURPOSE The purpose of this pilot project is to identify areas where there may be potential for the ALR boundaries to be modified to better reflect the current conditions of the land. The primary focus of the review is to examine the external ALR boundaries within the areas of interest. Specifically, the following project outcomes were identified: To increase confidence in the accuracy of the ALR boundary through remapping where required. To identify areas for potential exclusion from the ALR on the basis of poor agricultural suitability. To identify areas potentially suitable for inclusion in the ALR. To generate information that may be useful in developing potential actions or policies to support agriculture and decision-making within the project area. 1.3 OUTCOMES It is anticipated that this report will be used to achieve one or more of the following outcomes: 1. That the ALC enter into a Delegation Agreement with the RDEK for non-farm uses and subdivisions in the Elk Valley as recommended in this report; or A General Order (blanket approval) approving the non-farm uses and subdivisions in the Elk Valley as recommended in this report be granted; 2. The project be used as a template for future ALR review projects; and 3. That the Commission accept the recommendations of this report when reviewing ALR exclusion and inclusion applications. Of the four outcomes, the preferred action would be to have a general order granted or a delegation agreement established. This would allow the RDEK to manage site specific land use matters while allowing the ALC to pursue their mandate. In addition, using this project as a template for future ALR reviews would be beneficial to the RDEK and any other local government wishing to conduct their own review. August 2009 Page 2

11 2.0 BOUNDARY REVIEW 2.1 INTRODUCTION One of the primary outcomes of this project is to increase confidence in the accuracy of the ALR boundaries in the Elk Valley. The Elk Valley s ALR boundaries were established in 1974 at a scale of 1:50,000. Due to the small scale of the mapping, the boundaries of the ALR cover a larger extent of the Elk Valley rather than on an individual parcel basis. The soils capability mapping underlying the ALR boundary was based on an interpretation of a soils survey that was done at a scale of 1:63,360. The small scale of the original soils mapping, possible mapping errors, and the nature of applications considered by the ALC over time indicate that boundaries may not accurately reflect the location and extent of suitable agricultural lands in the valley. This project is the first detailed review of the boundaries since their inception. The boundary review does not imply that property will be excluded from or included in the ALR, nor make it easier to develop. It is not anticipated that block ALR exclusions or inclusions will be made. Instead, future applications by individual land owners that comply with the recommendations made in this report will be more likely to gain RDEK support and receive a favourable decision from the ALC. 2.2 BACKGROUND Soil capability mapping is one of the primary factors in determining agricultural suitability of land. It is often used as the basis for determining a parcel's suitability for exclusion from or inclusion into the ALR. The capability mapping for British Columbia is divided into seven classes (classes 1-7) for agriculture with class 1 having the highest capability of supporting the widest range of crops through to class 7 representing the lowest with little or no productivity capability. In addition to the primary classes, there are a number of limiting subclasses that identify specific limitations or management practices needed to improve the soil capability. For the purposes of this report the capability ratings are referred to, followed by the improvable ratings in brackets where available. A table explaining the classification system is attached to this report for reference. When reviewing agricultural capability, consideration should be given to the fact that agriculture can be divided into two broad categories: 1. soil bound, where capability ratings are important, and 2.non-soil bound agriculture such as greenhouses, where soil capability is less relevant. In addition to the soil capabilities for the study area, additional characteristics must be taken into consideration to give an accurate picture of the overall agricultural suitability of the Elk Valley. The approximate elevation of the valley ranges from 1000 m in Fernie to 1137 m in Sparwood, in contrast to 538 m in Creston, which is the closest community with a significant amount of agricultural activity. The Plant Hardiness Zone, as indentified by Natural Resources Canada's Canadian Forest Service indicates the valley is split between the 4b zone in the Fernie area, reducing to 3b moving north. In comparison, Creston is zone 6a. The zone scale ranges from 0, being the harshest to zone 8 being the mildest. The Elk Valley also experiences a frost free period of approximately 90 days. August 2009 Page 3

12 It is acknowledged that climate change could have an impact on the plant hardiness zone designations, the future number of frost free days and overall agricultural suitability of parcels. However, giving consideration to future climate change models and their impacts on agriculture in the Elk Valley is beyond the scope of the project. 2.3 SCOPE & METHODOLOGY The study area for the pilot project consists of Electoral Area A within the RDEK. Included in the project area are 3 participating municipalities: the City of Fernie, District of Sparwood, and District of Elkford. The electoral area, including the municipalities, is approximately 494,900 ha (1,222,924 ac) in area with approximately 13,190 ha (32,595 ac) or 2.7% of land within the ALR Study Area Definition Due to the large extent of land within the ALR, it was necessary to narrow the scope of the project area by outlining key areas of interest requiring field investigation. The areas of interest were identified using a set of criteria identified by the RDEK, ALC, and participating municipalities. The initial downsizing of the study area resulted in eliminating lands within the 200 year floodplain, property owned by Tembec, The Nature Conservancy, coal mining companies, large tracts of Crown land and lands with slopes in excess of 30%. Lands remaining after the initial land base reduction were further refined to the key areas of interest by reviewing and compiling information from the following: current ALR boundary mapping; agricultural capability mapping; topographic mapping; Canada Land Inventory Mapping; aerial photography; previous and ongoing applications to the ALC; other areas as deemed appropriate. An in-office review identified the final area of interest polygons that were the focus of the field investigations. The intent of the field investigations were to determine the agricultural capability, suitability, and areas for potential ALR boundary adjustments based on the following: topographic, climatic and other constraints; obvious anomalies and inconsistencies with existing information; existing agricultural and non-agricultural land uses and infrastructure; parcelization; other criteria as deemed appropriate. August 2009 Page 4

13 2.3.2 Field Work The field work was conducted by an RDEK summer student with assistance provided by RDEK planning staff over a 2 ½ month period from August to mid October The field reviews consisted of confirming the conditions of each area by determining the constraints, agricultural and non-agricultural land uses, vegetation, and using a GPS to accurately map the information. Detailed soils analysis was not completed as part of this project. Extensive field notes were taken, compiled, analyzed, and mapped on a series of base maps that were used to develop the options and accompanying figures attached in this report Limitations Over the course of the project, there were limitations, which resulted in portions of the study area not being reviewed in detail. Due to the limited agrology experience of staff conducting the reviews, there were areas identified as potentially requiring further review by an agrologist to determine the agricultural capability and suitability for inclusion and exclusion from the ALR. In addition, a majority of the areas of interest were on private property which required staff to receive consent of property owners to enter upon the lands to conduct the review. Access to all the areas of interest was not provided, limiting staff s ability to conduct detailed field reviews of those lands. 2.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Results of the in-office research and field investigations produced recommendations on potential boundary modifications, exclusions, and inclusions for each of the nine subareas. The recommendations are illustrated graphically on the attached figures. In most cases, a number of potential options have been presented. At the time of application by individual land owners, it is the intention of the RDEK to use the recommendations contained in this report when reviewing the applications. Below is a summary of the ALR land affected by this report: Total ALR: 13,190 ha (32,595 ac) Area supported for exclusion: 1,137 ha (2810 ac) Area supported for inclusion: 432 ha (1068 ac) Net difference: 705 ha (1742 ac) Percentage of ALR lands in the Elk Valley supported for exclusion: 8.7% 5.3% (after inclusions are added) The detailed analysis and recommendations are described in the following subarea summaries. August 2009 Page 5

14 2.4.1 CUNLIFFE ROAD DICKEN ROAD FERNIE SHOP ROAD SUBAREA Background The subarea was identified by the RDEK as an area of interest based on the current ALR boundary configuration over the properties northwest of Cunliffe and Dicken Roads and the existing land uses in the Fernie Shop Road area. A portion of the subarea west of the existing ALR boundary was identified by the ALC as an area for possible inclusion into the ALR. Observations The ALR boundary follows a north-south alignment then changes direction bisecting the properties at approximately 45 degrees in a northeasterly direction following no obvious legal boundaries, land forms, or agricultural capability lines. This area appeared to have distinct land form characteristics in comparison to the adjacent properties. Map and field review of the lands north of Cunliffe Road identified the following: Slopes of approximately 20% and greater rise from the road right-of-way in a northwesterly direction. Lots A and 2-7, Plan NEP71592 are heavily treed, sloped, and gullied. Due to slope constraints, the properties are accessed via common drives. The travelled portion of Cunliffe Road terminates at a dead end. The rightof-way continues up a very steep slope. Agricultural capability: classes 5 6 T 6 4 T (5 6 T 6 4 T ) and 4 6 M P 4 W (3 6 X MP 4 W ) No agricultural uses were observed. The Fernie Shop Road area is comprised of approximately 6.8 ha (17 ac) which is heavily disturbed and used as a works yard. In addition there are 19 smaller lot residential parcels and approximately 1.5 ha (3.8 ac) occupied by a mobile home park. Due to access limitations, a field review of the westerly inclusion lands within Lots 10 & 11, Plan 1411 was not conducted. Options Figure 1 & 1A Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 Amend the ALR boundary to follow legal parcel boundaries. Potential removal of 8.7 ha (21.7 ac) of land from the ALR. Amend the ALR boundary to follow the toe of slope. Block exclusion of the Fernie Shop Road area excluding approximately 15.4 ha (38.1 ac) Option #3A Block exclusion of subarea due to parcelization and limited agricultural use. Total area approximately 71.6 ha (176.8 ac). August 2009 Page 6

15 Westerly Inclusion Area Plan 1411, Lots 10 & 11 Due to access limitations, a detailed ground survey was not conducted however, based on a visual assessment, photographs, air photo interpretation and an agricultural capability rating of classes 5 6 T 6 4 T the area suggested for inclusion may not be suitable. Photos Cunliffe Road dead -end - right-of-way continues uphill August 2009 Page 7

16 Looking down Cunliffe Road right-of-way Looking downhill to the northeast from ALR boundary August 2009 Page 8

17 Westerly Inclusion Area Looking northwest to potential inclusion area Lots 10 & 11, PL 1411 Looking southwest to potential inclusion area August 2009 Page 9

18 2.4.2 DICKEN ROAD (NORTH) HARTLEY CREEK ROAD BRYANT ROAD SUBAREA Background The subarea was identified by both the RDEK and ALC as requiring further review due to the irregularity of the ALR boundary lines bisecting properties, potential steep slopes, and areas that may have potential for inclusion into the ALR. Observations The existing ALR boundary is a continuation of the boundary discussed in the Cunliffe Road Dicken Road subarea. The boundary does not appear to follow any distinct land forms or parcel lines but once the ALR boundary was overlaid onto the air photos there appeared to be some correlation between the toe of the slope and the boundary. Map and field review of District Lot 6394 and Lot 5, Plan 1411 identified the following: Areas outside the ALR located on District Lot 6394 have been cleared and are under production. Property has farm assessment. Agricultural capability: classes 5 6 T 6 4 T (5 6 4 T 6 T ). Photo interpretation shows the northwest corner has been logged or cleared, but detailed field review was not completed due to access constraints. Lot 5, Plan 1411 lying east of the ALR boundary is flat and under production. Lot 2, Plan 1411 is approximately 21.3 ha (52.7 ac) in size and contains an 8.5 ha mobile home park which has been in existence since approximately Agricultural capability of the mobile home park land is class 4 M (3 M ). Due to the mobile home park development the land is heavily disturbed. Approval to exclude the 16 ha (39.5 ac) mobile home park was granted in 1995 but the exclusion was never finalized. The remainder of the parcel area has capability ratings of classes 5 6 T 6 4 T (5 6 T 6 4 T ) and 4 6 m MP 4 W (3 6 X MP 4 W ). The Hartley Creek Road area of interest was identified by the ALC as an area having potential for steep slopes and limited agricultural capability. The lands exhibited the following characteristics: The southern end of the area of interest has slopes between 30-40% in a gully. Slopes in the remainder of the area range between 15-30%. A small cleared plateau (landing) exists at the northern end off Hartley Creek Road. Terrain is rolling and treed. Agricultural capability: classes 5 6 T 6 4 T (5 6 T 6 4 T ) and 6 T. The area of interest identified by the ALC was expanded by the RDEK to include all the lands to the west as they exhibited the same characteristic as previously identified. In addition, some lands adjacent to the boundary were excluded in 2007 due to limited agricultural capability. August 2009 Page 10

19 The Bryant Road area of interest was identified by the ALC as having potential slope constraints. Field review determined the property was fairly flat with only a small narrow portion exhibiting steep slopes. Options Figure 2 Option #1 Option #2 Exclude the lands identified based on slopes, agricultural capability, and current land uses. Exclusion of approximately ha (407.1 ac). Boundary amended to reflect the current slopes as continued from Figure 1. Bryant Road Area (not shown) No changes to the ALR boundary recommended. Photos Hartley Creek draw area of interest August 2009 Page 11

20 Flattest portion of Hartley Creek area of interest August 2009 Page 12

21 2.4.3 MORRISSEY SUBAREA Background The Morrissey subarea was identified by both the ALC and RDEK as an area requiring further review. Based on initial mapping review there were portions of the subarea that indicated potential for inclusion into the ALR and lands containing steep slopes that required further investigation. Observations The ALR boundary follows a north-south direction along the legal boundaries between District Lots 2315 and 6672 then follows an irregular directional line bisecting District Lot 6030 with the westerly portions of District Lot 6030 being outside of the ALR. A small triangular shaped portion of land adjacent to the highway and located within District Lots 13860, 4853 and was identified as having potential constraints. Morrissey South Map and field reconnaissance of District Lots 6672 and 6030 identified the following: Northerly portion of District Lot 6672 has a large (approx. 8.0 ha) gravel pit operation and is heavily disturbed. Southerly portion is treed with snags throughout. The observed soils appeared to be largely cobbles as a result of a mountain creek / watercourse passing through the parcel. The upper bench of District Lot 6030 has a significant area cleared and in agricultural production. Portions not in the ALR have been cleared / logged and do not have significant slope constraints. The cleared lands are not in production but may have agricultural potential. 5 Agricultural capability: classes 6 PT 7 3 TC T (6 PT 7 3 TC 5 2 T ) and 4 6 TM 5 4 TM (3 6 4 T 4 TM ), however. Further investigation by an agrologist may identify areas with greater capability potential. Morrissey North Map and field review of the Morrissey triangle (DL 13860) identified the following: Very steep slopes along the highway and internally that range from 22% to over 40%. Dense cedar-hemlock forest cover. No evidence of agricultural use. Agricultural capability: class 6 T. August 2009 Page 13

22 Review of District Lot indicates the property is flat with agricultural use. A portion of District Lot 4853 has been cleared with the remainder of the property being treed and having slopes rising to the west. Agricultural capability is class 6 T. Options Morrissey South Figure 3 Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 Amend the ALR boundary on DL 6030 to add additional lands into the ALR using an existing wildlife fence line as the proposed boundary. Potential inclusion of 17.8 ha (44 ac). Amend the ALR boundary to include the remainder of DL Align the boundary along legal parcel lines removing approximately 30 ha (76 ac) from the ALR and adding approximately 32 ha (80 ac). Exclude DL 2315 in exchange for additional lands being added on DL Approximately 36 ha (90 ac) for exclusion. Morrissey North Figure 4 Option #1 Exclude the areas from the ALR. Total exclusion area of approximately 99 ha (244.6 ac) Photos Agricultural fields on DL 6030 August 2009 Page 14

23 Cleared lands on DL 6030 Cleared / logged lands beyond fence line August 2009 Page 15

24 Soil conditions on part of DL 2315 & 6672 View of gravel operation on DL 6672 August 2009 Page 16

25 Morrissey triangle (DL13860) Morrissey triangle upland August 2009 Page 17

26 2.4.4 ANDERSON ROAD SUBAREA Background The Anderson Road area was identified by the RDEK and ALC as an area requiring detailed investigation. Mapping identified the area as having potential slope constraints in the western portion of the subdivision. In addition, the Anderson Road area is bound by City of Fernie lands to the south and east and is designated as an urban expansion area in the RDEK Fernie Area Land Use Strategy. Observations The ALR boundary currently runs in a north-south direction along the westerly boundary of the Anderson Road subdivision. The boundary takes an eastwest direction bisecting the northerly properties following no apparent land forms or legal parcel lines. Map and field review identified the following characteristics: Properties west of Anderson Road (Lots 25-34) have significant slope constraints with slopes rising in a westerly direction, averaging in the mid 20% range with 25% slopes being common. Lots 35 and 36 do not exhibit the same slope characteristics as the land levels out adjacent to Mount Fernie Park Road. Elevation difference between the road edge and top of the slope is approximately 57 metres. Lots east of Anderson Road have obvious agricultural uses. A greenhouse operation in the northern extent and cleared fields on the lower portions of the properties fronting Highway 3. The southerly lots are treed and gullied with slopes of approximately 14%. Agricultural capability of the sloped portions of Anderson Road are classes 5 6 T T, 6 T, and T - 3 T. The lower east and west lots have capability ratings of 2X and 4 MT (3 T ) respectively. The parcels on the north side of Anderson Road and on Joinson Road have the following characteristics: The lots are treed and have significant gullies and ravines with slopes averaging between 24-26%. The flatter plateaus have slopes of 10%. No distinctive features differentiate the lands in and outside of the ALR. Agricultural capability: classes T - 6 T and T 3 T. Options Figure 5 Option #1 Amend the ALR boundary to reflect the existing slope conditions for the westerly and northern lots by modifying the boundary line to follow the toe of the slope along the westerly lots and along the road right-of-way in the northern extent. Approximately 46 ha (114 ac) would be removed from the ALR. August 2009 Page 18

27 Option #2 Amend the ALR boundary to remove all the westerly and northerly lots from the ALR by following legal parcel lines and road right-of-way. Figure 5A SPA #2 Option #3 Exclusion of the subarea. Photos Productive portions of Anderson Road August 2009 Page 19

28 2.4.5 VANLERBERG ROAD SUBAREA Background The Vanlerberg Road subarea was identified by the RDEK as an area requiring further investigation due to the small lot residential nature of the area. The average parcel size is 0.4 ha (1.0 ac). In addition, approximately 1.6 ha (4.0 ac) is occupied by a mobile home park. Observations Small lot residential use with no indication of agricultural use. Lots 8-9, Plan 7032 are occupied by a mobile home park. Agricultural capability: class 4 MF (3 FM ) Options Figure 6 Option #1 Exclude the subarea due to its parcelization. Approximately 9.7 ha (24 ac) for exclusion. August 2009 Page 20

29 2.4.6 HOSMER BEESE ROAD SUBAREA Background The Hosmer Beese Road subarea was identified by the ALR and RDEK as an area requiring further review. Mapping indicated there were areas west of the Elk River that may have suitability for inclusion into the ALR and areas with potential for minor boundary adjustments. Observations Two areas of interest were identified by the ALC as having potential for review. The first area of interest was a triangular portion of DL on Beese Road west of Hosmer. Mapping indicates this portion of land as having potential steep slopes requiring further review. The second area north of District Lot was identified as having potential for agriculture based on topography and soil mapping. The boundary in Hosmer was identified by the RDEK as needing further review due to the current configuation which does not appear to follow legal parcel boundaries or agricultrual capability boundaries. Field and map review identified the following: West Hosmer The 7.6 ha (19 ac) portion of District Lot identified was treed and had slopes of 14%. A smaller 3.3 ha (8.2 ac) triangular portion immediately south of the area of interest, which is not in the ALR is cleared and has agricultural uses with no obvious slope constraints.the area north of District Lot within District Lots 2962 and 363 have slopes ranging between 8-12% on the west side of the Forest Service Road. Slopes in the western extent of the area exhibit steeper slopes. Lands east of the road drop-off to the floodplain lands and river. Agricultural capability: classes 5 6 TP 4 4 TP and 7 TC. Hosmer Townsite The townsite ALR boundary follows a road right-of-way for a short distance in a north-south direction then turns to the east not following legal parcel boundaries, land forms or agricultural capability boundaries. The boundary bisects properties. The properties bisected by the boundary exhibit the same vegetation and ground characteristics. Options Figures 7 & 8 Option #1 Boundary adjustment / trade to include the area under production and exclude the portion of District Lot Area to be excluded 7.8 ha (19 ac). Area to be included 3.2 ha (8.0 ac). August 2009 Page 21

30 Option #2 Option #3 Amend the boundary to exclude the townsite, mobile home park and surrounding area. Total excluded area approximately 63.6 ha (157.1 ac) Inclusion into the ALR for cattle grazing priority. Potential inclusion of ha (382.9 ac). Photos Portion of DL14953 not in the ALR that may be suitable for inclusion August 2009 Page 22

31 Area of Interest for Inclusion requiring futher review August 2009 Page 23

32 East side of Stephenson Road - Hosmer August 2009 Page 24

33 2.4.7 NORTH-WEST HOSMER SUBAREA Background The two areas of interest immediately north-west of Hosmer on the west side of the Elk River were identified by the ALC as having potential for inclusion and exclusion. Observations The southern area within District Lot 2963 is not within the ALR. Mapping indicates the area as having slopes and soils that may support agriculture. The north-western portion of District Lot 2964 that is within the ALR was identified as having potential for slopes in excess of 30%. Map and field review identified the following: Inclusion Area District Lot 2963 is currently being used for cattle grazing. The area between the road and river has been cleared / logged and has slopes of less than 5%. The elevation of the area is 3700 ft. The westerly boundary of the area of interest has steep slopes in draws. Agricultural capability classes are 6 6 TP 7 4 TC and 7 TG with a small portion on the southern end having a capability of class 4 T. Exclusion Area The northwest portion of District Lot 2964 is mostly treed with rolling terrain from the Forest Service Road with slopes up to 25%. Agricultural capability: classes 6 6 TP 7 4 TC and TP 4 M. Options Figure 9 Option #1 Option #2 Inclusion into the ALR for cattle grazing priority. Potential inclusion of ha (605 ac). Conduct further field review and possible agrologist review to confirm suitability for exclusion from the ALR. Total exclusion of ha (320 ac). August 2009 Page 25

34 Photos District Lot 2963 Area for possible inclusion District Lot 2964 Area for possible exclusion August 2009 Page 26

35 2.4.8 SOUTH SPARWOOD SUBAREA Background The South Sparwood subarea was identified by both the ALC and District of Sparwood as an area requiring investigation for potential exclusion from the ALR due to steep slopes. Lands identified by the District of Sparwood are considered for potential future industrial use development. Observations Lands west of the Elk River within District Lots and and the portion of District Lot 4589 east of the District of Sparwood boundary were identified as areas for potential exclusion due to steep slopes. Lands identified by the District of Sparwood include Lot 1, Plan 7590 and a number of parcels between the Elk River and Highway 3 south of the city center. Lands within the RDEK Map and field review identified the following: Portions of District Lots & exhibited slopes rising to the west. The lands appeared to be thinned forest with active cattle grazing on cleared lands adjacent to the river. Agricultural capability: class 7 CT. The land within District Lot 4598 was treed with lower slopes ranging between 12-15% increasing to slopes of 25-30%. 6 4 Agricultural capability: class 6 TR 7 TC. Lot 1, Plan 7590 (Parcel 9) is flat with a steep slope dropping from the highway. The area has been logged and replanted. No agricultural activity evident. Agricultural capability: class 5 M. Lands within the District of Sparwood Lands identified by the District of Sparwood within municipal boundaries exhibited the following characteristics: Parcel 6 Land is cleared, flat and within the floodplain of the Elk River. Currently being leased for a small agricultural activity. The treed portion is a poplar stand with portions exhibiting saturated soil conditions. Soils were sandy with large cobbles. Parcel 7 Property bound by the railway and highway. The property has recently been logged. The parcel is undulating with benches and steep slopes. August 2009 Page 27

36 Parcel 8 The property has been partially logged. Consists of a bench adjacent to the highway with steep slopes in excess of 30% dropping to the river. The bench is bisected by a series of steeper gullies. The soils appear to be rocky (based on visual inspection in areas disturbed by logging equipment). Agricultural capability are classes 5 PT, 4 MT (3 T ), and 6 T. Options Figure 10 Option #1 Option #2 Option #3 Exclude the properties as shown. Total exclusion area is approximately 142 ha (353 ac). Support possible exclusion on condition that the property be taken in by the District of Sparwood as part of their municipal boundary expansions. Area of exclusion is approximately 15.7 ha (38.9 ha). Possible exclusion potential pending further review by an agrologist. Total exclusion area could be approximately 35.4 ha (87.5 ac). Photos Area of interest DL s & looking Northwest August 2009 Page 28

37 Looking Southwest Parcel 6 Looking North August 2009 Page 29

38 Parcel 6 River bank soils Parcel 7 Benches August 2009 Page 30

39 Parcel 7 Slopes Parcel 8 Logged area August 2009 Page 31

40 Parcel 8 Soils Lot 1, Plan 7590 (Parcel 9) August 2009 Page 32

41 August 2009 Page 33

42 2.4.9 NORTH SPARWOOD SUBAREA Background The subarea north of the District of Sparwood was identified by both the RDEK and ALC as requiring further review due to the potential for steep slopes. The subarea primarily consists of large holdings parcels with active agriculture. The lands directly abutting the District of Sparwood boundary are smaller residential parcels with some agriculture activity. Observations The Savarie subdivision consists of smaller residential parcels with large parcels to the south and upslope to the west. A number of the smaller parcels are held by the Crown as a result of the avalanche hazard. Some of the parcels reviewed had small scale agricultural activity consisting of hay, cattle and horses. Map and field review identified the following: The parcels on Hillside Drive did have steep slopes in the rear with a large cliff further upslope. Due to access issues a detailed review was not possible. The larger parcels on the western edge of the subdivision also had some slope constraints in addition to potential avalanche hazard areas. The larger parcel north of the subdivision identified by the ALC had some slopes constraints, however, it appeared the slopes rose to a bench (approximately 40 ft. high). Agricultural capability is class 4 T for the lower portions of the subarea and class TP 7 TC for the remainder. The area identified by the ALC further north within District Lot exhibits slopes rising to the west. Due to limited access, detailed slope analysis was not done. Agricultural capability is class 6TP TC with smaller portions adjacent to the road having class 4 X. Options Figures 11 Option #1 Option #2 Exclusion as identified. Area has limited agricultural suitability due to parcelization, slopes and avalanche hazard. Total exclusion area of 125 ha (310 ac). Boundary adjustment to reflect eastern legal parcel lines due to slopes in the western portion of the property. Total area of 30 ha (76 ac) removed. Figure 12 District Lot No changes proposed. August 2009 Page 34

43 Photos Savarie subdivision area DL11710 Area of interest August 2009 Page 35

44 SPECIAL POLICY AREAS (SPA) Cunliffe Road Brenners Road SPA #1 The Cunliffe - Brenners Road special policy area, as outlined on Figure 1, is identified as an urban expansion area in the Fernie Area Land Use Strategy. The City of Fernie has expressed interest in the parcels identified as an area for future expansion of the Ghostrider service commercial area. The expansion has been entrenched in the City of Fernie Official Community Plan. The area exhibits the following characteristics: Flat with a small bench on the north end of the properties. Agricultural capability: classes 4 7 MF 5 3 MP and 4 M. Appear to have agricultural activities taking place over portions of the lands. Recommendation Exclusion is supported subject to incorporation into the City of Fernie. Anderson Road and South SPA #2 Removal of all lands as identified on Figure 5A is supported. Lands in the immediate vicinity exhibiting similar characteristics were removed from the ALR and incorporated into the City of Fernie. The Anderson Road subdivision has been identified as an urban expansion area within the Fernie Area Land Use Strategy. Recommendation Exclusion is supported. August 2009 Page 36

45 3.0 POLICIES 3.1 INTRODUCTION The policy section is intended to provide the RDEK and Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) with direction to support decision making when reviewing applications for subdivision and non-farm use in the Elk Valley. As part of the process for developing the policies, a review of the ALC mandate and current Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation in relation to the Elk Valley Zoning Bylaw No. 829 was conducted. In addition, a review of Statistics Canada 2006 Census of Agriculture information for the Elk Valley was completed to gain insight into the state of agriculture in Electoral Area A while providing background information to support the recommendations made in this report. As part of the policy development process a public meeting was held to gather input and feedback from the public on ALR related issues in the Elk Valley. 3.2 BACKGROUND ALC Mandate and Regulations Review As previously identified, the ALC s mission is to: to preserve agricultural land; to encourage farming in collaboration with other communities of interest; and to encourage local governments, First Nations, the government and its agents to enable and accommodate farm use of agricultural land and uses compatible with agriculture in their plans, bylaws and policies. When considering the ALC s mission, their mandate is based on big picture, long term preservation of lands while encouraging agriculture in the province of BC. However, when reviewing Part 2, section 3 of the Use, Subdivision and Procedures Regulation (B.C. Reg. 171/2002) and accompanying policies in the context of the Elk Valley, the ALC is micro-managing land use rather than focusing on the long term goals of the ALC. Parcel specific land use should be managed by the local government. It is recognized that bylaws may contain uses which will never be compatible with agriculture and in many cases bylaws have not been reviewed in great detail due to limited resources at the ALC and ministerial levels. If this is the case, then a delegation agreement or general order are the appropriate tools to exempt acceptable land uses and allow specific subdivisions from requiring ALC approval. In the absence of local government regulations or the tools mentioned above, the ALC s Use, Subdivision and Procedures Regulation is the appropriate management tool. A comparison between regulations contained in B.C. Reg. 171/2002 and zoning provisions contained in the Elk Valley Zoning Bylaw are shown in Table 1. The last column in the table aims to provide some points of comparison and discussion between the different regulations which will be used to formulate policy direction to be presented to the ALC for approval. August 2009 Page 37