Changing a Prime Agricultural (PA) Designation

Most farmers know good land when they see it or work it but assessing the specific characteristics that limit the land’s capability and providing proof in a form that addresses the criteria set out in the Provincial Policy Statement requires evaluation by a professional agrologist qualified to provide land capability assessments.

Three criteria are important in this evaluation:

1. The soil class in accordance with the Canada Land Inventory Classification System for Agriculture.
2. A review of the investment in agricultural production on the subject lands and in the immediate area.
3. An assessment of the adjacent land uses to demonstrate that the subject lands are part of a larger area of lower capability lands or uses other than agriculture.

A preliminary "desktop" assessment can determine if the basic elements necessary for a change in designation are present. This assessment can then justify the investment in an on-site investigation that will document limitations. The site visit will enable the preparation of a written report and accompanying graphic representation of the detailed soil capability evaluation. The process then becomes a planning process, either as part of an overall update of the local Official Plan (OP) or as part of an application to amend the OP to change the designation.

Protecting agricultural land is a critical planning objective on many levels. However, it must also be understood that many Prime Agricultural designations were determined without onsite testing. A detailed assessment can either confirm that the land is worthy of protection or is a candidate for re-designation. Bob Clark’s qualifications as a land use planner and agrologist provide valuable expertise in agricultural assessment. In addition to walking the land and evaluating the capability, a land use planner can provide the justification for a change in land use. Relying on a “drive by” site visit or desk top evaluation does not provide the accuracy or detail required to evaluate individual parcels. With re-designation, lands that could not be farmed because they were restricted by the PA designation can be used productively for a variety of rural uses.

Testing Quality and Capability – Why?

Agricultural Land Evaluations provide a detailed assessment of the agricultural capability of a site. But why do you need them and who should do them?

Available information in Ontario in the form of soils and Canada Land Inventory (CLI) mapping is not sufficiently detailed to reflect actual onsite conditions and is accurate only in a general sense. These evaluations are mandated by Ontario Power Authority as a part of their Solar FIT Application process and by the Province and Municipalities as part of the planning process in rural areas in order to ensure the protection of agricultural land.

Ministry guidelines require on-site testing with a minimum of one test pit for every 5 acres; more test pits are required for lands with greater variation of constraints. Soil capability characteristics may require an assessment of the ability to provide sub-surface drainage, the extent and degree of slope and evidence of flooding and periodic high water table.

The evaluation should provide mapping of constraints and an assessment of capability with a comparison of historic soils information. Experience suggests that historic decisions on fencing, field layout and cropping patterns are all indications of the inherent capability of the site. Therefore, it is our practice to discuss the site with the owner and review their experience in order to provide context to the testing to be conducted during the site visit.

Who should prepare an evaluation? CCS’ extensive experience in the fields of both land use planning and agriculture allows the firm to provide a comprehensive assessment of capability and compatibility for agricultural potential and/or conflict of land use.

Why Not Rely on the Available CLI Mapping and Soils Reports?

The Province of Ontario prepared a series of Soil Survey Reports that cover most of the Province. Although conducted approximately 50 years ago, they accurately reflect the soils in an area. The description provided in the written report, although dated, is accurate and detailed. The CLI mapping prepared from these reports assigns a classification by soil type but fails to identify variations within the soil type. For example, soils identified as Class 3, generally good quality, can have depressed areas that are very difficult to cultivate due to high water table and stoniness. These variations can affect large areas. Therefore, desk top assessments and “drive by” site visits fail to identify these critical variations that can significantly affect the capability rating of the land.

Other extremes have also been seen where the soil type identifies steep slopes as a constraint. Actual onsite visits confirm that steep slopes may be present but they occupy only a small portion of the lands classified within the mapped soil type. Only a site specific soil evaluation can provide a detailed refinement of the classification.

Agricultural Impact Assessment (AIA)

A new tool in the rural planner's tool kit

As rural areas come under pressure to accommodate non-agricultural uses, a new justification is being increasingly requested. The Agricultural Impact Assessment provides a basis to evaluate the impact of non-farm uses on existing and potential farm operations. These Assessments can form part of an Environmental Assessment for infrastructure/public projects. The assessment will include documentation of the current agricultural uses and a determination of the potential for traditional and non-traditional forms of agricultural production. Like other impact assessments, the AIA requires an identification of potential impacts and limitations imposed on agriculture in an area of 1 to 2 km from the proposed land use or project. All aspects of agriculture are to be considered including the flexibility to allow agriculture to respond to the changing nature of farming for food and fibre production. 

An AIA is usually required by an Official Plan policy for an area that permits a variety of uses including farming and may also be used where infrastructure projects are proposed in Prime Agricultural areas. Including these policies as a part of a Municipalities’ development approval process recognizes the importance of identifying the mixed use character of rural land while protecting the existing and future agricultural potential of the area. Not all Municipalities have identified the benefits of making the AIA a part of their mandatory approval process. However, Municipalities who have not made this distinction must rely only on Minimum Distance Separation calculations (MDS) which considers only livestock operations. They risk the approval of non-farm uses without an appreciation for their impact on the full range of farming operations.

Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) Calculations:

Can they “shut down the smell?”

Hugh Stewart of CCS remembers his days at OMAFRA. “ I got calls from people who had moved to a rural area from a more urban setting, built their dream home and were astounded by what they found. They would call and request that we send someone out to the site and shut down the smells created by neighbouring farm operations. They had no appreciation for the realities of agricultural operations. They were only interested in ‘buying the view’.”

You can’t get rid of the odours but there are now guidelines in place to ensure that complaints and nuisances can be reduced through the application of the MDS Formulae and guidelines.

Recent trends in livestock production have seen a dramatic change in the distribution and housing of animals in rural areas. Increasingly, new livestock operations are more sophisticated and specialized; requiring larger facilities. Older, smaller barns are often not suited for today’s livestock operations. Gone are the days when a dairy herd of 30 cattle is viable and profitable. Today’s herd of 60 or more head requires larger housing and generates more manure. The smaller barns, now found to be insufficient for many operations, are being converted for storage and other uses not involving livestock.

The Minimum Distance Separation calculation provides a method of determining the distance required for other non-farm uses in proximity to livestock facilities. CCS is often asked to prepare MDS calculations to show that smaller, repurposed barns do not pose a nuisance and that larger operations warrant the separation distance as calculated by the MDS regulations. As well the MDS calculation serves as a guideline for proposed expansion of livestock facilities.

The theory is that distance will reduce the incompatibility caused by odours, noise and other nuisances associated with livestock facilities. The calculation requires consideration of the use of the barns within the study area, housing capacity of the livestock facility and the ability of the land on which the livestock facility is located to assimilate the manure created by the livestock.

The Implementation Guidelines, as set out by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs outline the circumstances under which the calculation is to be applied. The main consideration is the need to maintain flexibility for livestock facilities to ensure that older structures can be repurposed or that existing operations may consider expansion when the market for livestock production is there.

The Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) can be varied as set out in the Guidelines. An argument can also be advanced that varying the MDS is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement however, the application of judgment should be used to guide decisions when the situation warrants. Varying the MDS for older barns converted to storage or those that provide only temporary shelter is justified.