EAST HANTS: Patchwork isn’t going to cut it.

Changes and amendments to the agricultural policies in East Hants will not be approved this summer after councillors with the Municipality of East Hants have sent it back to the Planning Department for further study.

“I think, at best, what we are proposing is patchwork,” said Councillor Eleanor Roulston. “That’s all it is: Patchwork.”

Councillors are still concerned with the restrictions placed on lands in the Agricultural Reserve zoning.

An Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) was struck last year and their findings on the municipality’s agricultural policies were reported in April 2010.

One of the main concerns at the time was the municipality’s agriculture reserve zoning. Because some of it falls within the growth management area in Shubenacadie, it’s proposed to be rezoned. To have some rezoned and have other lands left as is bothers councillors in zoned areas. Parts of the municipality are un-zoned. Farmers in this area have no restrictions on their lands.

“The current regulations in place allow for two lots to be subdivided a year,” said Roulston of the opportunities farmers in the zoned area have to subdivide their land. “They’re still zoned agricultural. That wasn’t the purpose of doing that.

“I’m just kind of amazed that somebody never pointed it out to us in all of these years. What’s the point in allowing a farmer to subdivide building lots off of his land if nobody can do anything with it?”

Councillor Willy Versteeg said this needs to change.

“We don’t have a level playing field within our own municipality,” he said, “and we don’t have a level playing field provincially. I think our agriculture policy needs to be a living document.”

Not all councillors feel compelled to change zoning for farmers looking to change the use of their land. Deputy Warden Jim Smith considers farming to be like every other business in the municipality.

“I consider the farming industry to be just like any other industry,” he said. “The big difference is that farmers usually occupy the land where they are at. If you open a manufacturing plant, chances are you live somewhere else.”

Leaving the farm business is no different for Smith than leaving any other.

“Eventually, you grow the business, you have an exit strategy, and you sell the business,” he said, “and I see farming no differently. If I buy a piece of property for commercial development and I want to slice off a piece to develop a lot, we don’t allow that.

“The agricultural land is the exact same way.”

But Councillor MacInnis argues farmers cannot sell for what other industries can.

“It’s too restrictive,” she said. “You can live next to a neighbour who is not zoned at all and can do whatever that neighbour wishes to do and you cannot. And that’s right within our own municipality.

“This is not fair. This is not consistent. This is a general statement that I agree with that we have to protect agricultural land. We say we’re protecting agricultural land and it’s affecting someone so they can’t build a home on the land that’s been in the family for 100 years.”

MacInnis sat on the AAC. She said she knows their work isn’t finished from the experience she garnered.

“I agree with much of what we did,” she said. “We put a lot of work into that. But I think there’s room for improvement “

Because of this, the document has been handed back to staff for more consultation with the AAC. Versteeg has requested staff revisit the amendments and report back to councillors before December.

acameron@enfieldweeklypress.com